View Full Version : Leave your religious message in towns!
Lone Wolf
06-27-2007, 13:40
Yeah? Well not every God fearing person is a Jehova nut bag pal..........
why do you born again types "fear" god?
The Weasel
06-27-2007, 13:52
No, they're obnoxious in thinking there's an exception for their religious literature and in setting "traps" for people like Hurcules and Fal do.
And Weasel, I'm surprised that a lawyer thinks that someone's intentions justify their actions.
Tater, you shouldn't be surprised. In the law, intentions often either justify or excuse actions. The classic example used in law school is the "surgeon's choice": If a surgeon acts in the operating room in a way that she knows will result in death, that would usually be considered a form of illegal homicide. But what if the surgeon is separating conjoined ("Siamese") twins, when to do nothign will result in the death of both, but operating will, certainly, cause the death of one? That is a homicide - the death of a human - but the intention removes it from being illegal, i.e. murder. Lawyers call that "justification."
Aggressive evangelicals call it "justification" too. Of course they're obnoxious. They feel they have to be; to them, the alternative is that they are letting someone die, eternally, when if they act, they might save that person. How would you act in the "shelter on fire" situation? Would you just quietly get up and let others burn to death? No one could let that happen; it would be horrible to live a life after that, knowing you might have made a difference if you'd acted.
I don't agree with the evangelicals that way, and my beliefs are not that others - or I - am in the same risk. But I just ask you, as you (and I) grit out teeth at such things, to have a small bit of understanding for what they think they are doing for us. I hope they're wrong.
The Weasel
The Weasel
06-27-2007, 14:00
why do you born again types "fear" god?
It's not just the "born agains" who use the term, which comes from the King James Bible translation. A more current contextual use of the term would be respect for someone with total, absolute power, beyond our ability to fathom. It's not a classic "I'm afraid of someone because they want to do things that will hurt me," but more akin to, "He can do anything, literally anything, beyond my ability to understand, and there is nothing I can do to stop it." Theologically, once you get your arms around that, one starts to figure out the second half; God's love: A being that can do anything it wants, right up to destroying the universe, chooses to love an infinitesimally small and unimportant speck, i.e. me. When someone figures that out, they may call that their "born again" moment. Others just go, "Wow!" But it's one helluva "Wow!"
The Weasel
Appalachian Tater
06-27-2007, 14:02
Weasel, I understand what they think they are doing and that's exactly why I find it so obnoxious. If I didn't understand what they were doing, I would try to reserve judgement.
I can just about guarantee you that there would not be 13 pages of discussions about some one leaving a copy of Dinetices, Hindu poetry, or a biography of Mohammad etc in a shelter. What is about Jesus that makes people so reactionary. Say it is "what has been done in Jesus name that was negative" I do not think so. Everything democracy, religion, Backpacking everything has been used for both good and evil. Just about every University and Hospital and relief agency in the USA was started in the name of Christ. Jesus and those who follow his teachings have done more good for this country then just about anything "ask any one who suffered during the hurricanes in south east who helped them the most! I also do not understand why people think you can make the bible say whatever you want that is not true sure you can proof text some obscure thing but the great tents of the faith have been believed and practiced since the beginning " Love the Lord your God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself". The vast majority of faithful Christians have done this for over 2000 years just like most backpackers care for the trail and each other the 2% that are selfish and narcissistic do not undue all the good. Why do people hate Christ and Christians and tolerate every thing else maybe because He is Lord. I also guarantee you that backpackers in general are more dogmatic about their Lite-wight backpacking, hammocks, or hatred of shelters then they are about there religious beliefs yet people are so testy about it. If you do not believe it fine do not believe it. Just like if you do not want to sleep in hammock or if you want to carry60 lbs fine. However I am always interested in learning about people finding new ways to care about individuals and if some one loves Jesus tell me about! I want to know why he means so much to you. If you love lite wight hyper lite backpacking tell me about it I want to know you and why you love that it is an honor that you would share with me something you love. If you love carrying an Iron skillet tell me about it. Every person even the annoying know it all or the religious fanatic is a person of worth and worth your time. Learn to listen to their story and you might learn you can be a blessing to them help them or they can help you. I believe people are of great worth to God and also to me we need to slow down and listen and care for the person who cares enough to share with you a little bit of themselves regardless of rather we agree or not. Why do people feel threatened by others beliefs religious political or even equipment choices I believe it is a reflection of a wound, loss or hole in there on lives.
Appalachian Tater
06-27-2007, 14:44
I can just about guarantee you that there would not be 13 pages of discussions about some one leaving a copy of Dinetices, Hindu poetry, or a biography of Mohammad etc in a shelter. What is about Jesus that makes people so reactionary. Say it is "what has been done in Jesus name that was negative" I do not think so. Everything democracy, religion, Backpacking everything has been used for both good and evil. Just about every University and Hospital and relief agency in the USA was started in the name of Christ. Jesus and those who follow his teachings have done more good for this country then just about anything "ask any one who suffered during the hurricanes in south east who helped them the most! I also do not understand why people think you can make the bible say whatever you want that is not true sure you can proof text some obscure thing but the great tents of the faith have been believed and practiced since the beginning " Love the Lord your God with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself". The vast majority of faithful Christians have done this for over 2000 years just like most backpackers care for the trail and each other the 2% that are selfish and narcissistic do not undue all the good. Why do people hate Christ and Christians and tolerate every thing else maybe because He is Lord. I also guarantee you that backpackers in general are more dogmatic about their Lite-wight backpacking, hammocks, or hatred of shelters then they are about there religious beliefs yet people are so testy about it. If you do not believe it fine do not believe it. Just like if you do not want to sleep in hammock or if you want to carry60 lbs fine. However I am always interested in learning about people finding new ways to care about individuals and if some one loves Jesus tell me about! I want to know why he means so much to you. If you love lite wight hyper lite backpacking tell me about it I want to know you and why you love that it is an honor that you would share with me something you love. If you love carrying an Iron skillet tell me about it. Every person even the annoying know it all or the religious fanatic is a person of worth and worth your time. Learn to listen to their story and you might learn you can be a blessing to them help them or they can help you. I believe people are of great worth to God and also to me we need to slow down and listen and care for the person who cares enough to share with you a little bit of themselves regardless of rather we agree or not. Why do people feel threatened by others beliefs religious political or even equipment choices I believe it is a reflection of a wound, loss or hole in there on lives.
That one long paragraph is the message-board equivalent of leaving a new testament bible in a shelter.
The Weasel
06-27-2007, 14:58
That one long paragraph is the message-board equivalent of leaving a new testament bible in a shelter.
Well, that's the difference between a shelter and a forum, 'Tater.
But I'll answer Natchez, and bluntly, too:
As I've said above, I empathize with those who wish to preach where ever they go, Natchez. But stop it with the "Why does everyone hate Jesus and Christians" trash. It's part of the cute little "Christians are persecuted" trashtalke that you'd like to believe is true, and isn't. There's no persecution, there's no hatred, and you're not a victim. Grow up.
As for the other religions, or even ideas, when they get intrusive, they irritate people too. I've told more than a couple people in shelters that wanted to argue politics at midnight that I was tired and they should take their discussion elsewhere. Like those times, it's not your ideas or beliefs that really piss people off. It's how you and a lot of people push them.
What people hate is people like you acting like a radio with no "off" knob. You've got the right, and maybe by your lights the duty, to preach. But that doesn't mean that people don't get irritated by the combination of intrusive preaching combined with people like you whining, "Oh, stop persecuting me and stop hatin' Jesus" when they want a little peace and quiet.
So jam it, Natchez. Jesus, like Rock, doesn't like snivelers.
The Weasel
superman
06-27-2007, 15:03
When I crossed the big puddle in “68” after two tours a whole big bunch of people called me a baby killer and worse. They fancied themselves to be the good people with the moral high ground and divine insight as to the righteous ways which didn’t include me.
Ever since then there has been one “good” person after another informing me of the evilness of my ways and means. Hell, I didn’t re-up because I loved the military so much. I re-upped because I was never going buy the good people’s bull ----. From time to time the good people stop at my house and stress that anyone who has served in combat can never go to heaven. This is the same religion which does not allow their people to serve in the military. These good people get a free ride in this country and enjoy their religious freedom because it was secured by military. Yet, they jump right up to presume that it’s god’s will that I do the long time in hell for having served my country. Anyone who thinks for a minute that this country is kept safe by the good people is wrong. It’s absolute nonsense to think that if we’re nice to the bad guys that they’ll be nice to us. Shoot, I’m not all that big on going to heaven anyways. I’d just a soon go to where my friends are. In the mean while I don’t want to see no stinken pamphlets.
http://groups.msn.com/OldGUYthenandnow/shoebox.msnw (http://groups.msn.com/OldGUYthenandnow/shoebox.msnw)
Appalachian Tater
06-27-2007, 15:07
Superman, if Jehovah's Witnessness bother you, just invite them in for coffee. Then tell them that you're an apostate and that you always enjoy discussing religion with members of the church.
They won't bother you any more.
superman
06-27-2007, 15:17
Superman, if Jehovah's Witnessness bother you, just invite them in for coffee. Then tell them that you're an apostate and that you always enjoy discussing religion with members of the church.
They won't bother you any more.
apostate: Definition, Synonyms and Much More from Answers.com (http://www.answers.com/topic/apostate)apostate n. One who has abandoned one's religious faith, a political party, one's principles, or a cause.
It's not just the Jehovah Cult but they're up there. I had to look apostate up. What I lack in religious orientation I make up for in "cause"......cause they tick me off. :mad:
Dances with Mice
06-27-2007, 15:22
I just tell the door knocking Witnesses and LDS kids that I'm not worried about religion because I intend to die the day the Atlanta Falcons win the Superbowl.
That way I'll have a long life and if I go to Hell it'll be cold.
Rain Man
06-27-2007, 15:26
... Why do people feel threatened by others beliefs religious political or even equipment choices I believe it is a reflection of a wound, loss or hole in there on lives.
I think you are right. So,-- as Jesus commanded,-- go in your closet and after you have shut the door, pray in secret ... about why you feel so threatened and what your rant reflects.
Rain:sunMan
.
Nightwalker
06-27-2007, 16:03
if registers are ok in shelters, bibles or any other religious stuff in shelters are fine too. i leave readers digests occasionally.
I love finding things like that to read around shelter areas. Though I don't sleep in shelters that often, I visit most of them.
Hey Wolf, do you find that most folks are only LNT about the things that bother them personally? If they really believed in LNT, there'd be no trails in the woods!
Even though that's hypocritical, I don't hold it against them, because most do it without knowing it.
Whatever, I guess. My butt hurts. :)
Maybe you are right Rain man lol
Both of my Grandads fought for this country in WWII both where Christian. I would fight for my Country. I believe some things are worth fighting for and dieing for. I am thankful for all who do. Sargent York one of my favorite movies which explores the issue of Christianity and war.
I could give a rip less what anyone thinks of my beliefs personally. I do not feel at all mistreated or discriminated aginst and if I did it would not make me feel any thing more then blessed. Dude I am super blessed and very happy, I am just saying people seem like they will tollerate anything except Christians. I was asking a retorical question why do people get so emotional over the issue of Jesus or the bible (14 pgs worth of emotion lol) and not some one leaving other lituature in the shelter. I will agree that people can be pushy about there beliefs political, religious, or even equipment, but that is just people not the fault of a system of belief. Some people are pains by nature not the Bible, Jesus, or Politics as a system of ideas or a philosopy. Maybe I am one of those people Rainman lol
I do not feel attacked as a Christian because some people hate God or my understanding of God. I thank God I live in a country where I can believe preach say whatever I want and if others do not like it they can buy a pair of ear plugs. lol
I appreciate those men and Women who died so we can print, talk and believe what our convictions tell us to even when we do not agree.
However, I still find it interesting how people get more emotional over the issue of Jesus then say huminism or budisum. I believe (you do not have to) that this is related to the inherant truth of it.
I disagree with Jehovah Witness but they are facinitaing. They do not profess or believe Jesus is deity. But man they and the mormons are committed and they as individuals have nothing to gain from knocking on my door. I love to talk to them and I feel blessed that they care enough to be concerned for me. Even though I disagree with them. It takes alot of nerve to knock on a strangers door. Many of them are just young passionate kids I am glad that have a strong belief in something in a world where it is ever more popular to be cynical and pessimistic about every thing. Sure I wish they believed I think they are wrong but I still repect that they believe something with great passion!
Every Blessing
Alan
Nightwalker
06-27-2007, 16:09
Yeah? Well not every God fearing person is a Jehova nut bag pal..........
Hey Larry! In times past, you and I have both been pretty obnoxious about this stuff, if you remember the same as I do. I'll bet we ran off lots of people arguing about religion on this very website!
Just sayin'...
Nightwalker
06-27-2007, 16:13
I bet you they do more than you can imagine.................
I'll bet they don't. Not much love involved. Just fear and doom-and-gloom.
Jesus never spoke to folks like that, except to the religious leaders who were trying to run things their way and not God's, of course.
Lone Wolf
06-27-2007, 16:14
Both of my Grandads fought for this country in WWII both where Christian. I would fight for my Country. I believe some things are worth fighting for and dieing for. I am thankful for all who do. Sargent York one of my favorite movies which explores the issue of Christianity and war.
I could give a rip less what anyone thinks of my beliefs personally. I do not feel at all mistreated or discriminated aginst and if I did it would not make me feel any thing more then blessed. Dude I am super blessed and very happy, I am just saying people seem like they will tollerate anything except Christians. I was asking a retorical question why do people get so emotional over the issue of Jesus or the bible (14 pgs worth of emotion lol) and not some one leaving other lituature in the shelter. I will agree that people can be pushy about there beliefs political, religious, or even equipment, but that is just people not the fault of a system of belief. Some people are pains by nature not the Bible, Jesus, or Politics as a system of ideas or a philosopy. Maybe I am one of those people Rainman lol
I do not feel attacked as a Christian because some people hate God or my understanding of God. I thank God I live in a country where I can believe preach say whatever I want and if others do not like it they can buy a pair of ear plugs. lol
I appreciate those men and Women who died so we can print, talk and believe what our convictions tell us to even when we do not agree.
However, I still find it interesting how people get more emotional over the issue of Jesus then say huminism or budisum. I believe (you do not have to) that this is related to the inherant truth of it.
I disagree with Jehovah Witness but they are facinitaing. They do not profess or believe Jesus is deity. But man they and the mormons are committed and they as individuals have nothing to gain from knocking on my door. I love to talk to them and I feel blessed that they care enough to be concerned for me. Even though I disagree with them. It takes alot of nerve to knock on a strangers door. Many of them are just young passionate kids I am glad that have a strong belief in something in a world where it is ever more popular to be cynical and pessimistic about every thing. Sure I wish they believed I think they are wrong but I still repect that they believe something with great passion!
Every Blessing
Alan
i ain't a believer and ain't threatened by people who do. bibles don't bother me in shelters. course i don't stay in them. most non-believers are scared
Appalachian Tater
06-27-2007, 16:17
Shelters suck.
Lone Wolf
06-27-2007, 16:19
Shelters suck.
you're a broken record. i'm gonna help build a new shelter soon here north od damascus. gonna stock it with bibles too
superman
06-27-2007, 16:23
Seems like a direct correlation between how much people push their religious views and how screwed up they are. The "in your face with god" and here's a pamphelt bunch should clean up their own back yard. If they pack their anti-social crap in they should pack it out and not mess up a potentially perfect dog kennel.
Cookerhiker
06-27-2007, 16:24
i ain't a believer and ain't threatened by people who do. bibles don't bother me in shelters. course i don't stay in them. most non-believers are scared
Well Wolf, if these evangelists want to reach you to save you from eternal damnation, they'd better leave their bibles and literatures in other places - on the Trail, at Dot's, the golf course, Baja grill......
I like my tent better to and I can leave my Bible there and no one will ever know lol but I will drop of my Koran in the shelter as that will not bother any one lol just kidding I have always packed out mine and others trash but I leave the registers and the Bible alone lol
Lone Wolf
06-27-2007, 16:28
Well Wolf, if these evangelists want to reach you to save you from eternal damnation, they'd better leave their bibles and literatures in other places - on the Trail, at Dot's, the golf course, Baja grill......
we got 9 churches and a slew of bible thumpers here in town. ain't none of them approched me yet. must be cuz i'm a yankee. they may think i'm one of them cath O licks! talk about a screwed up bunch
I would also like to see fair tax pamphlets left lol
Appalachian Tater
06-27-2007, 16:28
you're a broken record. i'm gonna help build a new shelter soon here north od damascus. gonna stock it with bibles too
L. Wolf, if you build the shelter, I'll stock it with bibles for you!!!
they may think i'm one of them cath O licks! talk about a screwed up bunch
Yes, but at least we know hypocrisy when we see it. Usually we just need to look in the mirror.:rolleyes:
Dances with Mice
06-27-2007, 17:59
OK, Bibles in shelters. Let's talk about them. Here's the life cycle of a shelter bible:
They're always, without any exceptions, the orange vinyl covered New Testament and Psalms ones bought wholesale by the Gideons International and given away by the handful at every county fair I've attended in Georgia. If there's any other type at a shelter I haven't seen it. I'm sure that's where they're born.
First a well-meaning disciple hikes along in Spring with half a pack full of orange covered vinyl give-a-ways and distributes them in every shelter. I've never seen a new one after May. Your shelter's mileage may vary.
Within one week the shelter mice have seen the Light, commenced worshiping and taken fragments away to study in their nests. Maybe there are mice revivals? .
The second week pages get torn out to start fires in the firepit. The mice continue to harvest what's left.
By the third week the entire thing's been thrown into the firepit and nothing's left but the orange viny cover that melts but doesn't burn all that well.
A little while later a maintainer rakes them out of the firepit along with sardine cans, tops of beenie weenies, unrecognizeable plastic bits, semi-burnt paperbacks and Boy Scout kneckerchief slides and hauls them back to the nearest road to haul to a trash can.
So what am I missing?
copythat
06-27-2007, 18:03
OK, Bibles in shelters. Let's talk about them. Here's the life cycle of a shelter bible:
They're always, without any exceptions, the orange vinyl covered New Testament and Psalms ones bought wholesale by the Gideons International and given away by the handful at every county fair I've attended in Georgia. If there's any other type at a shelter I haven't seen it. I'm sure that's where they're born.
First a well-meaning disciple hikes along in Spring with half a pack full of orange covered vinyl give-a-ways and distributes them in every shelter. I've never seen a new one after May. Your shelter's mileage may vary.
Within one week the shelter mice have seen the Light, commenced worshiping and taken fragments away to study in their nests. Maybe there are mice revivals? .
The second week pages get torn out to start fires in the firepit. The mice continue to harvest what's left.
By the third week the entire thing's been thrown into the firepit and nothing's left but the orange viny cover that melts but doesn't burn all that well.
A little while later a maintainer rakes them out of the firepit along with sardine cans, tops of beenie weenies, unrecognizeable plastic bits, semi-burnt paperbacks and Boy Scout kneckerchief slides and hauls them back to the nearest road to haul to a trash can.
So what am I missing?
AMEN!
now here's an idea ...
... print one on t.p. and leave it in the privy. people can read a bit, and then pack it out! win-win!
So what am I missing?
Ummmmm.......emergency toilet paper?
I was on Max Patch last Saturday evening, planning to camp out on the summit. Around 7 I spied a big church van plus a long line of vehicles driving into the parking lot. 30 or more people struggled up the hill with lawn chairs, coolers, musical instruments, etc. (A bunch of them went straight up the closed trail past the sign telling people not to do that because of the erosion problems.) It was a 7th Day Adventist group from Asheville. They sat in a circle and did their thing for an hour or so. It was way too crowded for us, so we moved on down the hill out of sight and sound. They were friendly enough and didn't push either literature or conversation on us but, dang, there were soooo many of them.
Marta/Five-Leaf
When I encounter people like this that represent the church but are blatantly dissing the rules I usually let them know just what kind of message they are emitting without letting them know my belief.....
why do you born again types "fear" god?
Let me rephrase that to "respect." fear is not as fear seems to be in the way I quoted it. I am not afraid, but I truly respect Him. So that's how I "fear" Him.
I stand by what I said.
I bet you don't either..........
It's not just the "born agains" who use the term, which comes from the King James Bible translation. A more current contextual use of the term would be respect for someone with total, absolute power, beyond our ability to fathom. It's not a classic "I'm afraid of someone because they want to do things that will hurt me," but more akin to, "He can do anything, literally anything, beyond my ability to understand, and there is nothing I can do to stop it." Theologically, once you get your arms around that, one starts to figure out the second half; God's love: A being that can do anything it wants, right up to destroying the universe, chooses to love an infinitesimally small and unimportant speck, i.e. me. When someone figures that out, they may call that their "born again" moment. Others just go, "Wow!" But it's one helluva "Wow!"
The Weasel
Yeah! That's right!
Hey Larry! In times past, you and I have both been pretty obnoxious about this stuff, if you remember the same as I do. I'll bet we ran off lots of people arguing about religion on this very website!
Just sayin'...
Nah, I ain't worried about running anyone away from God......that's their choice.....
I'll bet they don't. Not much love involved. Just fear and doom-and-gloom.
Jesus never spoke to folks like that, except to the religious leaders who were trying to run things their way and not God's, of course.
Okay........
you're a broken record. i'm gonna help build a new shelter soon here north od damascus. gonna stock it with bibles too
Hey I'll bring some Readers Digest and give you a hand........
we got 9 churches and a slew of bible thumpers here in town. ain't none of them approched me yet. must be cuz i'm a yankee. they may think i'm one of them cath O licks! talk about a screwed up bunch
It's not because your a yankee, it's because your a Swamp Yankee and they probably figure where you would tell them to put their bibles. And one things for sure, I have neve met any perfect Christians in my life and I am at the top of the list........
Dances with Mice
06-27-2007, 18:51
Ummmmm.......emergency toilet paper?BTDT. 2 small, 2 thin & 2 slick 2 B effective. Not a bad idea, though, you're thinking outside the roll.
Another thing: I've never met anyone who says they're hiking in order to spread the Holy Freebies and I've never read a shelter register mentioning that they left a copy of the Orange Vinyl Scriptures at a shelter. So who does it?
Worshipers of the Church of the Passive Aggressive?
Lone Wolf
06-27-2007, 19:01
I have neve met any perfect Christians in my life and I am at the top of the list........
that's cuz 100% of y'all are full of hypocritical stuff
superman
06-27-2007, 19:09
I bet you don't either..........
Yeah, I do.
that's cuz 100% of y'all are full of hypocritical stuff
Not quite 100%. Maybe 99.8% I've actually met a few people who talk and walk the line. They're the quiet ones no one ever hears from. They sort of make me jealous smoetimes.
that's cuz 100% of y'all are full of hypocritical stuff
I see your very observant. I believe you to be just as hypocritical and darn critical about it.............
Yeah, I do.
uh uh..............
There's a classic 'Calvin and Hobbes' cartoon where Hobbes (the tiger) asks Calvin (the kid) if he believes in God. After some thought Calvin replies, "Well, someones out to get me!" :D
uh uh..............
Thanks for the providing a demonstration of the kind of attitude that is being discussed in this thread.
Lone Wolf
06-27-2007, 21:08
I see your very observant. I believe you to be just as hypocritical and darn critical about it.............
i don't claim to be anything but an *******.
My religion(in case you're wondering) involves a 1-2 hour walk in the woods every Sunday morning. No books, bibles, or whatever else folks are selling.
Nature rules in my world. the birds, the bees , the critters, and me. Thats all.
And don't listen to L. Wolf , he ain't an *******.
Frolicking Dinosaurs
06-27-2007, 21:47
::: Dino contemplates photoshopping a teddy-bear A-hole :::
I was asking a retorical question why do people get so emotional over the issue of Jesus or the bible (14 pgs worth of emotion lol) and not some one leaving other lituature in the shelter.
Nobody is making a case for the other literature, but a case IS being made for the religious literature as if it should be exempt by default when a rule doesn't mention it specifically. Why should religious literature have this distinction? If it's "just literature" then it's disallowed.
It gets heated because the people claiming the exemption want to have their cake and eat it too, it's an unreasonable position, and the people who realise this are understandably frustrated. "It's just literature" when the rules allow literature, and it's something else when the rules don't. That's unreasonable, that frustrates and annoys people.
However, I still find it interesting how people get more emotional over the issue of Jesus then say huminism or budisum. I believe (you do not have to) that this is related to the inherant truth of it. They shouldn't leave stuff in the shelters either.
It's not because your a yankee, it's because your a Swamp Yankee and they probably figure where you would tell them to put their bibles. And one things for sure, I have neve met any perfect Christians in my life and I am at the top of the list........
What's a "perfect Christian?" As far as I can discern from the Bible, it's a binary, rather than a vector quantity, lest anyone boast.
What's a "perfect Christian?" As far as I can discern from the Bible, it's a binary, rather than a vector quantity, lest anyone boast.
Milla Jovovich in a habit? :-?
lol Dr. O you are logically consistent.
My point is that if some one had said pack out your paperback. Or stop leaving those copies of the biography of Gandhi or Walden. it would have got the pat lighten up brother from 4 people. However mention Jesus or the Bible and everyone is interested "including myself" and some people get all hostel.
I in no way think that religious literature be Christian, Humanist, or Buddhist should be necessarily exempt from some ethic or rule. (which I am not sure really exists but maybe it does) The fact is most people do not mind having a book left behind.
Once again I reiterate my original maybe unclear point (and I am not defending a position though I would be glad to) I find it interesting the emotion Jesus and the Bible cause for good or bad in people as compared with other belief systems.
Really how would people react to a thread leave your novels out of the shelters! 15 pages I doubt it. lol
lol Dr. O you are logically consistent.
My point is that if some one had said pack out your paperback. Or stop leaving those copies of the biography of Gandhi or Walden. it would have got the pat lighten up brother from 4 people. However mention Jesus or the Bible and everyone is interested "including myself" and some people get all hostel.
I in no way think that religious literature be Christian, Humanist, or Buddhist should be necessarily exempt from some ethic or rule. (which I am not sure really exists but maybe it does) The fact is most people do not mind having a book left behind.
Once again I reiterate my original maybe unclear point (and I am not defending a position though I would be glad to) I find it interesting the emotion Jesus and the Bible cause for good or bad in people as compared with other belief systems.
Really how would people react to a thread leave your novels out of the shelters! 15 pages I doubt it. lol
Have you left religious literature in shelters?
Appalachian Tater
06-28-2007, 00:39
Natchez, the reason people get upset about christian literature left in shelters is because so much christian literature is left in shelters. The reason people don't get upset about humanist or buddhist literature, or books by Thoreau or about Ghandi is because there aren't people hauling in stacks of these sorts of books to leave in the shelters.
Almost every single person who wants to read the bible while hiking carries a copy, ditto with Thoreau, and Stephen King, for that matter. Do you really think anybody picked up one of the eight or ten books about the resurrection left in a shelter in Virginia to read? I doubt it.
When someone leaves christian propaganda in a shelter it has to be removed. I've burnt some of it myself, if there was a fire, just like I burned other crap left there. It's no more appropriate to leave a bible than to leave a phone book or the Sunday paper.
When other stuff is left in shelters, hikers complain about that, too. Talk to a trail maintainer about how many trips they make to carry out how many pounds of garbage every year. Those bibles don't walk themselves out of the woods and throw themselves in the dumpster. They're carried out.
Christians are a small minority on this planet and you're being more a little hubristic by thinking that the reason people are upset is because of the power of your god or the truth of your religion. People are upset because of litterbugs. The fact that the litterbugs are self-righteous christians might not help the situation, but if they weren't litterbugs, they would be little discussion of them.
App Tater that is a very well reasoned response and makes good sense to me. I have hiked my whole life by the way and never seen a Bible in a shelter nor have I carried one. I have seen Backpacker mag and read it. I have been in the Smokies mostly so maybe the Ridge runners get to the Bibles before I have. I have seen lots of other trash left though.
By the way a self-righteousness and Christianity are mutually exclusive as a set of ideas any way.
It could be that people are getting upset because of the power of God but I make a different point and that is that people are inherently emotional in this country over the Christian religion maybe because of its historic roots although from my position I do think a spiritual side is at play. I mean 16 pages over litterbugs perhaps you are right but I doubt it.
People are inherently and universally religious even atheism is a faith commitment and I believe this thread demonstrates that with little doubt. That is the only point I am making.
I would also say that I believe there is a growing resentment against Christianity (some of it warranted no doubt) that you do not always see in other religions. Not that I particularly care as my faith is not based on public opinion. I am unashamed of who I am or who God is. lol I do not desire special treatment because of my faith commitments.
All in all a very interesting discussion. I just hope people will judge a philosophy on the content of its Ideas not just on the flawed individuals who represent it(myself included). I think we all need to listen to each other more patiently and compassionately. And then disagree it is good to disagree but do it with grace.
I however do not think it is all that useful to leave anything that becomes trash in a shelter. However I have never seen a Bible do that but maybe they do.
Peace to you
Alan
Appalachian Tater
06-28-2007, 01:51
Alan/Natchez, I'm glad that you understand what I'm saying and I agree with most of the points you are making as well.
Self-righteous and professing christian faith are NOT mutually exclusive, though. I think I understand where you're coming from on that, but an imperfect christian (all of them) could be self-righteous. Believe me, I've seen it many times.
No one here wants you to be ashamed of your religion or yourself. I agree with most of the tenents of christianity, but there seems to be a sort of "jesus is the only way to heaven" aspect of it that denigrates people of other faiths, faiths with fundamental beliefs that I also agree with. That may have something to do with the backlash against christianity. The fundamentalists trying to impose their beliefs and giving our tax money to christian organizations is highly offensive. Starting a war to provoke Armageddon is offensive as well.
Please also be assured that the bibles and christian literature left in shelters are as much litter as phone books would be. There is no difference in the physical substance and it is the physical substance that is litter. I have only hiked one summer, basically, but I saw it dozens of times.
Incidentally, the register serves a safety purpose by allowing people to be located by rangers or law enforcement personnel when needed.
I would also say that I believe there is a growing resentment against Christianity (some of it warranted no doubt) that you do not always see in other religions.
The growing resentment you perceive is not against the religion, it is against the people who are attempting to impose that religion and/or the values of that religion on the rest of us. Prayer in school, restrictions on the ability of women to deal with their fertility issues, "abstinence-only" sex education in school... I have no problem with your practice of your religion--just don't try to force it on me. The United States is supposed to be a secular society, not the Christian Iran.
Marta/Five-Leaf
The growing resentment you perceive is not against the religion, it is against the people who are attempting to impose that religion and/or the values of that religion on the rest of us. Prayer in school, restrictions on the ability of women to deal with their fertility issues, "abstinence-only" sex education in school... I have no problem with your practice of your religion--just don't try to force it on me. The United States is supposed to be a secular society, not the Christian Iran.
Marta/Five-Leaf
Exactly right. Probably the best response I've seen in this whole thread.
stranger
06-28-2007, 05:01
Most people I've met lead relatively insignificant lives, so when I see bibles at shelters it doesn't really surprise me. So many people have such a hard-on for convincing others of their so called beliefs of XYZ, it's not very intelligent really as actions speak louder than words. Are they trying to convince me or themselves? **** - I'm one happy guy!
Do people think by leaving bibles in shelters that others will read them and be converted? And if so what could possibly be more meaningless in life? You simply have no control over the situation and regardless of the result it had nothing to do with you. If someone was destined to read something and be so impressionable it's only a matter of time before they do so. It could be the bible yet it could be the communist manifesto.
I go on the trail to hike, to turn off, to relax and to take a break. I personally do not have a problem with bibles as they make great fire starters, and I do not read them or give their content the time of day, so that's my position. However, if you find yourself getting offended by such an insignificant action you might want to ask yourself why that is? Are you that impressionable? Is that a challenge to your beliefs? And how could your beliefs be challenged so easily?
Bibles are paper, toilet paper is paper, in both cases trees were cut down. There is absolutely no difference. Those who leave bibles in shelters have very serious issues, they are alone, they feel isolated, they are seeking to recruit more people like themselves...and I think they know deep down that they have a major flaw. This is fine as we all have flaws, but it's one thing to admit it and work to overcome the flaw and it's another to be impressionable and not think for yourself.
Pray for the Bible Leavers - God Knows (if there is a god) they need it more than anyone. And stay warm! Torn pages from Bibles can light the fire.
superman
06-28-2007, 07:01
uh uh..............
LOL, oh yeah..nut bags
aaroniguana
06-28-2007, 07:35
We had a discussion about this at Solstice last weekend. We came to the conclusion that Christian Fundamentalists (and Christians in general) have no remorse for their past indiscretions. So the loaves they historically cast upon the water need to come back to them.
It's all tinder to me.
Thanks for the providing a demonstration of the kind of attitude that is being discussed in this thread.
I'm glad I could oblige you..............but in all actuality I'm just playing with the guy.............:banana
i don't claim to be anything but an *******.
and darn good at it too................
And don't listen to L. Wolf , he ain't an *******.
Yeah he is because he said so..............
LOL, oh yeah..nut bags
Okay, okay, okay I admit it. I'm a nut bag! I've been this way ever since I met Jesus! I am finally out of the closet! I'll probably be crucified, but please go light on the nails guys, I'm pretty fat.........
We had a discussion about this at Solstice last weekend. We came to the conclusion that Christian Fundamentalists (and Christians in general) have no remorse for their past indiscretions. So the loaves they historically cast upon the water need to come back to them.
It's all tinder to me.
Well I don't know where you guys are getting your information, but I have met a plenty of Christians who can't let go of some of their past because they have never been able to forgive themselves over what ever it is they may have done.
superman
06-28-2007, 09:24
"I go on the trail to hike, to turn off, to relax and to take a break. I personally do not have a problem with bibles as they make great fire starters, and I do not read them or give their content the time of day, so that's my position. However, if you find yourself getting offended by such an insignificant action you might want to ask yourself why that is"?
These good people bible thumpen nut bags went out of there way to make sure that I knew that I was unwelcome back in my own country when I returned from Vietnam. To this day they make it clear that not only was I not welcome back then but that I have no chance of going to heaven.
In light of the people that I've met who claim that they have the key to heaven I damn sure don't want to go there....that would be hell to me.
The nut bags should hike their trash out. They are yet another reason to avoid shelters.
Thanks for the providing a demonstration of the kind of attitude that is being discussed in this thread.I was thinking the same thing. Arguing with a man, telling him he doesn't believe what he says he believes, and feeling it very important to repeatedly tell him, beating on him endlessly and uselessly.
That is the problem with yakkers, in my mind.
People like the Poteets (Gary and Lennie) and the ATservants (Craig and Suzie) do more good by being examples of how to live and showing love and tolerance while standing by their beliefs, than 10,000 pushy "salesmen" who turn people away with their ineffective rudeness.
If they all practiced "Do as I do" rather than "Do as I tell you to do" they would be a powerful force.
My 2 cents (even though I should know better than to post in this thread. It is pretty easy to see that while everyone is talking, there are not many people listening.)
man...this forum topic just wont die...
old topics NEVER fade away....they just go slightly comatose....
& then resurrected again...
I was thinking the same thing. Arguing with a man, telling him he doesn't believe what he says he believes, and feeling it very important to repeatedly tell him, beating on him endlessly and uselessly.
That is the problem with yakkers, in my mind.
People like the Poteets (Gary and Lennie) and the ATservants (Craig and Suzie) do more good by being examples of how to live and showing love and tolerance while standing by their beliefs, than 10,000 pushy "salesmen" who turn people away with their ineffective rudeness.
If they all practiced "Do as I do" rather than "Do as I tell you to do" they would be a powerful force.
My 2 cents (even though I should know better than to post in this thread. It is pretty easy to see that while everyone is talking, there are not many people listening.)
Let the man speak for himself, you guys are totally off base. I was just playing with the guy. Besides I'm about to become very non christian in a lot of ways. I still stand for what I believe though.
The way I see it, everyone has their own opinions and they are entitled to them. I get ribbed all the time, I get hated all the time, and so forth. Doesn't bother me one bit. Well sometimes anyway........
Frolicking Dinosaurs
06-28-2007, 10:53
::: Dino gets tail in the 'can of whup-tail' position and tucks TOW tenderly under dino-wing :::
Variations of this joke have been around since at least 1998 (first time I saw it..); someone probably came up with it earlier.
The last line is REALLY appropriate for this thread! :D
How many Whiteblaze users does it take to change a lightbulb?
One changes the light bulb, and posts that the light bulb has been changed.
14 share similar experiences about changing light bulbs, and advise how the light bulb could have been changed differently.
Seven caution readers about the dangers of changing light bulbs.
One advises we should move this question to the Lighting Forum.
Two argue that this question should be moved to the Electrical Forum.
Seven point out spelling and/or grammatical errors in posts about changing light bulbs.
Five members flame the spell checkers and grammarians.
Three members correct the spelling and grammar flamers.
Six argue whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb."
Six more chastise the previous six as being stupid.
Two industry professionals inform the group. the proper term is "lamp."
15 know-it-alls, claiming they were in the industry, advise "light bulb" is perfectly acceptable.
19 advise this forum is not about light bulbs, and request this discussion be moved to the Lightbulb Forum.
11 defend the posting to this forum pointing out that, since we all use light bulbs, they are relevant to this forum.
36 debate which lightbulb changing method is superior, which brands of light bulbs work best for this technique, which brands are faulty, and where to buy the best light bulbs.
Seven post URL's depicting examples of different light bulbs.
Four insist the URL's were posted incorrectly, and post correct URL's.
Three post links they found, from the URL's, that are relevant to this group making light bulb changing even more relevant to WB.
13 members link all the previous posts, quoting them in their entirety (including headers and signatures), and merely add, "Me too."
Five advise the light bulb controversy has become intolerable, and they will no longer post on WB.
Four ask, "Didn't we already go through this just a short time ago?"
13 advise, "Do a Google search on light bulbs before posting questions about light bulbs."
13 weigh every lightbulb brand available, and report their findings.
One Lurker will respond to the original post, six months from now, and start the process over again.
You forgot the "One old buck from Maine..." line. Beyond classic.
big_muddy
06-28-2007, 11:09
The proper term is lamp :sun
Variations of this joke have been around since at least 1998 (first time I saw it..); someone probably came up with it earlier.
The last line is REALLY appropriate for this thread! :D
How many Whiteblaze users does it take to change a lightbulb?
One changes the light bulb, and posts that the light bulb has been changed.
14 share similar experiences about changing light bulbs, and advise how the light bulb could have been changed differently.
Seven caution readers about the dangers of changing light bulbs.
One advises we should move this question to the Lighting Forum.
Two argue that this question should be moved to the Electrical Forum.
Seven point out spelling and/or grammatical errors in posts about changing light bulbs.
Five members flame the spell checkers and grammarians.
Three members correct the spelling and grammar flamers.
Six argue whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb."
Six more chastise the previous six as being stupid.
Two industry professionals inform the group. the proper term is "lamp."
15 know-it-alls, claiming they were in the industry, advise "light bulb" is perfectly acceptable.
19 advise this forum is not about light bulbs, and request this discussion be moved to the Lightbulb Forum.
11 defend the posting to this forum pointing out that, since we all use light bulbs, they are relevant to this forum.
36 debate which lightbulb changing method is superior, which brands of light bulbs work best for this technique, which brands are faulty, and where to buy the best light bulbs.
Seven post URL's depicting examples of different light bulbs.
Four insist the URL's were posted incorrectly, and post correct URL's.
Three post links they found, from the URL's, that are relevant to this group making light bulb changing even more relevant to WB.
13 members link all the previous posts, quoting them in their entirety (including headers and signatures), and merely add, "Me too."
Five advise the light bulb controversy has become intolerable, and they will no longer post on WB.
Four ask, "Didn't we already go through this just a short time ago?"
13 advise, "Do a Google search on light bulbs before posting questions about light bulbs."
13 weigh every lightbulb brand available, and report their findings.
One Lurker will respond to the original post, six months from now, and start the process over again.
Me too!!:D :D
The Weasel
06-28-2007, 11:50
Variations of this joke have been around since at least 1998 (first time I saw it..); someone probably came up with it earlier.
The last line is REALLY appropriate for this thread! :D
How many Whiteblaze users does it take to change a lightbulb?
One changes the light bulb, and posts that the light bulb has been changed.
14 share similar experiences about changing light bulbs, and advise how the light bulb could have been changed differently.
Seven caution readers about the dangers of changing light bulbs.
One advises we should move this question to the Lighting Forum.
Two argue that this question should be moved to the Electrical Forum.
Seven point out spelling and/or grammatical errors in posts about changing light bulbs.
Five members flame the spell checkers and grammarians.
Three members correct the spelling and grammar flamers.
Six argue whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb."
Six more chastise the previous six as being stupid.
Two industry professionals inform the group. the proper term is "lamp."
15 know-it-alls, claiming they were in the industry, advise "light bulb" is perfectly acceptable.
19 advise this forum is not about light bulbs, and request this discussion be moved to the Lightbulb Forum.
11 defend the posting to this forum pointing out that, since we all use light bulbs, they are relevant to this forum.
36 debate which lightbulb changing method is superior, which brands of light bulbs work best for this technique, which brands are faulty, and where to buy the best light bulbs.
Seven post URL's depicting examples of different light bulbs.
Four insist the URL's were posted incorrectly, and post correct URL's.
Three post links they found, from the URL's, that are relevant to this group making light bulb changing even more relevant to WB.
13 members link all the previous posts, quoting them in their entirety (including headers and signatures), and merely add, "Me too."
Five advise the light bulb controversy has become intolerable, and they will no longer post on WB.
Four ask, "Didn't we already go through this just a short time ago?"
13 advise, "Do a Google search on light bulbs before posting questions about light bulbs."
13 weigh every lightbulb brand available, and report their findings.
One Lurker will respond to the original post, six months from now, and start the process over again.
And you also forgot,
"22 will needlessly copy the entire quotes above them, cluttering up the thread beyond the ability of the serves to contain it."
The Weasel
...and someone will relay the rumor that Warren Doyle is using lightbulbs that were stolen from gas station restrooms. :D
Appalachian Tater
06-28-2007, 15:05
...and someone will relay the rumor that Warren Doyle is using lightbulbs that were stolen from gas station restrooms. :D
More like Warren Doyle makes a post bragging about how he stole the light bulbs because light bulbs should be free and how he walked the ENTIRE trail using stolen light bulbs and only "internegators" would chastise him for stealing. Then Doyle posts advertising his square dancing class where he charges other people to teach them how to steal lightbulbs while standing in a circle but never advises them to turn off the electricity before sticking their fingers in the socket.
jmcgarrahan
06-28-2007, 15:55
:banana
Weasel, I beleive your representation of the whole thing is so accurate it is actually frightening. Great job!
...and someone will relay the rumor that Warren Doyle is using lightbulbs that were stolen from gas station restrooms. :D
I'm not sure about Coast Guard approval, but it seems to me that a pack full of stolen light bulbs would make a pretty good flotation device for fording the Kennebec.
Programbo
06-28-2007, 22:07
My religion(in case you're wondering) involves a 1-2 hour walk in the woods.......Nature rules in my world. the birds, the bees , the critters, and me. Thats all..
Ah, so you are a Wiccan :p
Blessed Be and Merry Meet!
SunnyWalker
06-28-2007, 22:31
If you are against Christians witnessing their faith in whatever lawful way they choose you are on a loosing side of the argument. They have a constitutional right and you cannot stop them. You make not like it but wake up, its a free country. If you wish to curb liter, trash, etc., left in shelters I think you could probably make a case and ask for consideration from "Christian groups/witnessers" although this will be difficult.
Myself, I am a Christian and an ordained minister. I believe in witnessing my faith, but I am not going to leave trash, etc., and religious literature in shelters. I do not think this is the right approach. OK, thats my two cents worth. Yippeeeee! -SunnyWalker
Wanderingson
06-28-2007, 22:42
Ok, so I finally made the connection between religion and lightbulbs. I think we we one to something here--I'm just waiting for the light to come on--hey wait a minute, someone stole my light. Damn it's dark in here.
Frolicking Dinosaurs
06-28-2007, 23:07
Ok, so I finally made the connection between religion and lightbulbs. I think we we one to something here--I'm just waiting for the light to come on--hey wait a minute, someone stole my light. Damn it's dark in here.Here's the connection (http://www.wtv-zone.com/Mary/GospelMidisA-M/I-Saw-The-Light-.mid)
aaroniguana
06-29-2007, 07:02
If you are against Christians witnessing their faith in whatever lawful way they choose you are on a loosing side of the argument. They have a constitutional right and you cannot stop them. You make not like it but wake up, its a free country. If you wish to curb liter, trash, etc., left in shelters I think you could probably make a case and ask for consideration from "Christian groups/witnessers" although this will be difficult.
Myself, I am a Christian and an ordained minister. I believe in witnessing my faith, but I am not going to leave trash, etc., and religious literature in shelters. I do not think this is the right approach. OK, thats my two cents worth. Yippeeeee! -SunnyWalker
I proudly wore a uniform to defend your right to witness. And to defend my own right to pick up, pack up, risk breaking my neck night hiking to a new site so I can express my right to NOT experience someone attempting to wash me in the blood of Christ. It's freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. I already have one and don't need yours, thanks.
Frolicking Dinosaurs
06-29-2007, 08:32
Excellent points, AaronIguana. No one has the right to push religion -- any religion -- on people who don't want it. IMO, no one should have to pack up and move to avoid witnessing -- those witnessing need to hush when told the material isn't appreciated. My guess, given what he or she said, is that SunnyWalker would not continue to pursue the topic if asked to stop. As I said earlier, forcing people to listen to unwanted material actually pushes them further away rather than drawing them closer. How do you feel when a religious zealot shows up on your doorstep and won't take 'No, thanks' for an answer? Does it make you want to listen to them or does it make you act like you are not home the next time they show up?
Dances with Mice
06-29-2007, 08:51
Ah, so you are a Wiccan :p
Blessed Be and Merry Meet!My son's fiancee is a Wiccan. I told him "Son, you're so much luckier than most men ... you already know you're marrying a witch!"
But I don't think she's a strong Wiccan believer, more the type that just shows up at Coven on Solisice and Halloween.
RockyBob
06-29-2007, 11:09
My son's fiancee is a Wiccan. I told him "Son, you're so much luckier than most men ... you already know you're marrying a witch!"
But I don't think she's a strong Wiccan believer, more the type that just shows up at Coven on Solisice and Halloween.
Can she twitch her nose and make him a millionaire?
ric2hunt
06-29-2007, 11:53
I agree with both Frolicking Dinosaurs and Aaroniquana that people should not be forced to listen to preaching of any sort. Once someone says enough, the preaching should stop regardless of the subject. ie..global warming, religion, right to choose, etc... Also the person requesting the message be stopped need not be called names such as bigot, redneck, idiot, or other demeaning terms.
The Weasel
06-29-2007, 12:01
***. Once someone says enough, the preaching should stop regardless of the subject. ***
Enough.
The Weasel
Rain Man
06-29-2007, 12:02
And you also forgot,
"22 will needlessly copy the entire quotes above them, cluttering up the thread beyond the ability of the serves to contain it."
Also forgot "At least half a dozen will add drivel just to see themselves in print and run up their posts count."
:D
Rain Man
06-29-2007, 12:04
Also the person requesting the message be stopped need not be called names such as bigot, redneck, idiot, or other demeaning terms.
Nor told they "hate Jesus" or "hate Christians" or "hate Christianity."
Rain:sunMan
.
Unfortunately, any statement starting with the phrase "People should..." or "People should not..." has a very poor chance of coming to pass. Like never.
You can only control how you react to what other people dish out to you.
Marta/Five-Leaf
Frolicking Dinosaurs
06-29-2007, 13:04
Also forgot "At least half a dozen will add drivel just to see themselves in print and run up their posts count."::: Bites Rainman on toes to see self in print and run up post count :D :::
The Weasel
06-29-2007, 13:07
::: Bites Rainman on toes to see self in print and run up post count :D :::
Did someone just say, "Minnesota Smith"?
The Weasel
Blue Jay
06-29-2007, 13:21
But I don't think she's a strong Wiccan believer, more the type that just shows up at Coven on Solisice and Halloween.
Thank you for that one. I needed a good laugh and you delivered.
aaroniguana
06-29-2007, 14:59
How do you feel when a religious zealot shows up on your doorstep and won't take 'No, thanks' for an answer? Does it make you want to listen to them or does it make you act like you are not home the next time they show up?
No, I have a Labrador/Mastif mix that weighs about 130 pounds. He looks like a double sized lab, is as gentle and loveable as a teddy bear but people don't know that. When someone knocks on my door with some misguided notion that I need to be saved, I whistle and say "Angus, snack!" and they usually run. Or I answer the door in nothing but a deerskin loincloth carrying my Claymore (the sword, not the explosive device).
Further, I would never call names nor publicly belittle another person's beliefs because I certainly don't appreciate it when I am told I am a heretic or that I'm going straight to hell when I die. I am not a heretic. I am a tree-hugging, dirt-worshipping, whiskey-drinking, leather-wearing heathen with long hair and medeival weapons. And proud to be so.
SunnyWalker
06-29-2007, 21:24
Like I said, you may not like it, but people are going to witness or share their religious faith, if they have one. Me being a Christian, I will. Generally, when people indicate or give signals they do not want to discuss it I refrain. There is a lot of emotion here on this thread. One might ask themself why is it here? Your response will be to point outward. I would look inward. I appreciate the discussion, but one does not have to get nasty about it all. You do not have to look at this thread or read it. -SunnyWalker
aaroniguana
06-29-2007, 22:57
I won't get nasty, I won't get emotional, I won't ask you to stop, I'll just leave. And not talk to you if I see you again. Your god gave you the right to bear witness and share your beliefs with whomever you choose. My god gives me the right to remove your head and hang it from my doorpost if you irritate or insult me, but good taste, modern civility and laws against such acts prevent me from doing so.
The happy middle ground is for me to simply walk away. If you find that rude and disrespectful I suggest you turn your emotions inward and get over it.
Wow I guess we know how he feels lol
you guys are totally off base. I was just playing with the guyOkay, just realize it is hard for others to follow a discussion when some of the things you say are the opposite of what you mean.
The way I see it, everyone has their own opinions and they are entitled to them. Exactly, I agree 100%. Rather rude to keep hammering at someone to try to change their opinion to make it match yours. Now just substitute the word "religion" for "opinion" in your statement and we'll be on the same page totally.
Frolicking Dinosaurs
06-30-2007, 06:25
This is aimed at the Christian readers. Others please don't blast me for addressing these issues with like-minded people.
Let me try saying this another way: High pressure sells techniques -- things like hammering religion for prolonged periods over people objections or when they clearly are not interested, pressuring people into making a decision now, forcing people to address a need before they have seen the need themselves -- violate the rules of society and the rules set forth by Christ Himself. Doing this denies the power of God or the Holy Spirit to draw people. As I mentioned a couple of times in this thread, if you live a Christian life, people will notice. They will ask you about it.
Sometimes that 'still small voice (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=11&chapter=19&verse=11&end_verse=13&version=9&context=context)' or 'gentle whisper (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Kings%2019:11-13;&version=31;)' spoken about in the Bible will whisper in your ear that it is time to discuss salvation with someone. In order for you to hear that "small still voice', you will have to have your own house in order - meaning you will be talking with God regularly, listening to God regularly, reading His book regularly and making a genuine attempt to live by the principles in the book.
The 'shotgun' approach to witnessing bears a striking resemblance to two groups soundly condemned by Christ - the Pharisees and Sadducees. Both were oh-so-pious and made sure everybody knew it. Christ said their entire reward was here on earth.
13"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to.
15"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are.
1"Be careful not to do your 'acts of righteousness' before men, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven. 2"So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. 3But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.
5"And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. 6But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. 7And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. 8Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.
Nightwalker
06-30-2007, 08:20
There you go being wise again, ya danged toe-nibbler...
:)
I Love God. Jesus is his only son. I love people enough to want to tell them about it, but I also love them enough not to chase them away by telling them stuff when they're not ready or wanting to hear it.
In 2004, I was dumb enough to think that putting new testaments in every shelter during my hike was a good thing and not a bad one. Circuit Rider and I talked a bit, and he sensibly explained to me why it did more bad than good.
However, I have picked up a few of those little new testaments from shelters when I forgot and left mine at home, and can't imagine that I'd be the only one. I also saw a girl in '06 pick one up and say that it was exactly what she needed, at exactly the time she needed it. So who's to really say?
If you need to start a fire with a book, go ahead. If you want to throw it away, go ahead. Life is about choices, and you have many. God gave you that right! (End Sermon)
This is aimed at the Christian readers. Others please don't blast me for addressing these issues with like-minded people.
Let me try saying this another way: High pressure sells techniques -- things like hammering religion for prolonged periods over people objections or when they clearly are not interested, pressuring people into making a decision now, forcing people to address a need before they have seen the need themselves -- violate the rules of society and the rules set forth by Christ Himself. Doing this denies the power of God or the Holy Spirit to draw people. As I mentioned a couple of times in this thread, if you live a Christian life, people will notice. They will ask you about it.
Sometimes that 'still small voice (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=11&chapter=19&verse=11&end_verse=13&version=9&context=context)' or 'gentle whisper (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Kings%2019:11-13;&version=31;)' spoken about in the Bible will whisper in your ear that it is time to discuss salvation with someone. In order for you to hear that "small still voice', you will have to have your own house in order - meaning you will be talking with God regularly, listening to God regularly, reading His book regularly and making a genuine attempt to live by the principles in the book.
The 'shotgun' approach to witnessing bears a striking resemblance to two groups soundly condemned by Christ - the Pharisees and Sadducees. Both were oh-so-pious and made sure everybody knew it. Christ said their entire reward was here on earth.
Appalachian Tater
06-30-2007, 11:22
Nightwalker, don't leave litter in the shelters. Circuit Rider is an intelligent person and gave you good advice that still hasn't bored its way into your thick skull.
If you need something (lighter, food, bible) when hiking, bring it with you, or borrow it from another hiker, or get off the trail and buy it. Shelters are not repositories of supplies.
SunnyWalker
06-30-2007, 12:41
I originally responded on this thread because of the title, "Leave your religous messages in towns". This is arrogant, tramples on the rights of others and intolerant. And get real, it ain't gonna happen. People are going to share. I think one ought to be courteous in all things whether it is the subject one is discussing, or leaving literature in a shelter.
As far as "high pressure" well let me put it this way. I do not consider this a valid argument because I hardly ever see it. But what I do have to put up with is others use profane language, tell their sex-brag stories, beer drinking, cuss words, etc. and they do this with no thought of being courteous. So when you accuse religious people of "high pressure" think of others. I for one will just move on and not put up with this behavior. Again, you may not like religion and want it off the trail (the real reason for this thread in the beginning I think), but its going to happen. OK, don't accuse me of high pressure as this is a discussion started by someone else. Thanks. -SunnyWalker
The Old Fhart
06-30-2007, 12:54
Appalachian Tater-"If you need something (lighter, food, bible) when hiking, bring it with you, or borrow it from another hiker, or get off the trail and buy it. Shelters are not repositories of supplies."Right on target about bringing it with you! However, if you're too lazy to carry your own Bible you're probably not going to read one you happen to find laying around either. If you borrow it from others you're probably a leach and not carrying your own weight. As the song goes, "He ain't heavy, he's my brother". If you need it, or love it, carry it.
Likewise, don't leave any of your trash, tracts, etc., in shelters or on the trail. Leave No Trace; Carry In, Carry Out! And don't try to save me either.
SunnyWalker
06-30-2007, 12:57
Yeah, I like that Fhart. Before I read this thread I never even thought people would leave stuff other than food, in a shelter. I have as yet to walk the AT. Done much other. Start in July for a week. Thanks. -SunnyWalker
Wanderingson
06-30-2007, 13:56
Did someone just say, "Minnesota Smith"?
The Weasel
Minnesota Who?
Frolicking Dinosaurs
06-30-2007, 14:38
I originally responded on this thread because of the title, "Leave your religous messages in towns". This is arrogant, tramples on the rights of others and intolerant. And get real, it ain't gonna happen. People are going to share. I think one ought to be courteous in all things whether it is the subject one is discussing, or leaving literature in a shelter.
As far as "high pressure" well let me put it this way. I do not consider this a valid argument because I hardly ever see it. But what I do have to put up with is others use profane language, tell their sex-brag stories, beer drinking, cuss words, etc. and they do this with no thought of being courteous. So when you accuse religious people of "high pressure" think of others. I for one will just move on and not put up with this behavior. Again, you may not like religion and want it off the trail (the real reason for this thread in the beginning I think), but its going to happen. OK, don't accuse me of high pressure as this is a discussion started by someone else. Thanks.I wasn't aimming at you, SunnyWalker, nor at anyone in particular. Sorry you felt singled out. I re-read what you have written and still don't understand what you feel I was criticizing in your posts. I say in post 337 that I feel your comments indicate the opposite is true of you.
Hmmm... I could have sworn I read something in the Bible about Christians being held to different standards than non-believers. Guess I was mistaken. By all means, exercise your Constitutional right to be Just as pushy as they are in exposing you to their tells of sex, drinking, drugs and profanity -- I'm sure they will be falling all over themselves wanting what you have and listening to you. :datz
Minnesota Who?
Yosemite Sam's quieter cousin, right?;)
Gray Blazer
06-30-2007, 15:28
Who's intolerant? See you next time. JJ
Appalachian Tater
06-30-2007, 20:49
People are going to share.
Sharing is when you have something somebody else wants and you give them some. Giving somebody something they don't want and didn't ask for is NOT sharing. Assuming that somebody else wants something just because you like it and then giving it to them and making them stop you is NOT sharing, either. Saying, "I am a christian and I will tell you about Jesus if you would like me to" is offering to share. Witnessing and forcing the other person to make you stop or to leave is NOT sharing.
But what I do have to put up with is others use profane language, tell their sex-brag stories, beer drinking, cuss words, etc. and they do this with no thought of being courteous.
If someone is cursing at you or telling you a "sex-brag stories" or pouring beer down your throat, then they are wrong and you should tell them to stop. Someone else drinking beer is simply not your problem. Someone else cursing is not your problem. Two other people telling "sex-brag stories" to each other is not your problem. You have no more right to interfere with that than a third party would have to tell you not to talk to your friend about christianity.
I for one will just move on and not put up with this behavior. That would be wise. Matter of fact, if you get the urge to try to force someone else to listen to your religious (or political or whatever) beliefs, move on and don't make them put up with your behavior, either.
aaroniguana
06-30-2007, 22:02
I was really out of this thread after my last post but happened to remember this:
Like I said, you may not like it, but people are going to witness or share their religious faith, if they have one.
I'm people. I have a religious faith. I'm pretty devout, actually. I don't feel the need to share it. Other members of my Tuath (Clan) don't share. The forty or so of us have no interest in recruiting others to join us. Our beliefs are personal and private to us. We're not weird, we're not perverts, we don't do sacrifices, we don't worship Satan, we don't do anything that any other faith doesn't do. And we do not share.
For those of you who follow Christ: from a Christian standpoint, why do you suppose that is?
SunnyWalker
07-01-2007, 00:16
Sorry Frolicking Dinosuars. I was insensitive and was real hurried.
Let me say one last word-I for one am not going to spoil a hike by blasting or forcing religion on anyone. So if you meet me, I hope we call have a great time. I don't walk around judging folks and getting on them. What I was focusing on is the title on this thread and it is something like this: "leave your religious messages in town" or something like that. I feel THAT is intolerant. If one is really against litter lets tackle this in a more neutral way. -SunnyWalker
Cerridwen
07-01-2007, 01:25
I encountered Fal and Hercules while hiking down south-very generous trail magic, delicious food and a nice home-however after gulping down this lovely food and what appeared to be sincere and simple generosity, I felt incredibly manipulated and wished I had never been suckered into their home. After our meal, they proceeded to preach, in my opinion, potentially dangerous and destructive religious thought. I enjoy religoius discussion and philosophical debate, but this was the "one way and only way, one Truth" kind of crap that only excludes others, far from embracing-which I believe would believe would be proper Christian behavior, from what I learned in Sunday School (a long time ago). Books left in the shelters-fine. But don't invite me into your home with ulterior motives.
For those of you who follow Christ: from a Christian standpoint, why do you suppose that is?
Perhaps, they have not had the opportunity or will, to educate themselves to the scientific truth?:-?
Perhaps, they have not had the opportunity or will, to educate themselves to the scientific truth?:-?
The two aren't mutually exclusive, science and religion. Some people just make it seem that way.
The two aren't mutually exclusive, science and religion. Some people just make it seem that way.
They sure do. A local church petitioned our local school to not teach evolution, geology, etc.
It was ignored.
A local church petitioned our local school to not teach evolution, geology, etc.
It was ignored.
A wise community.:sun
Frolicking Dinosaurs
07-01-2007, 07:05
Sorry Frolicking Dinosuars. I was insensitive and was real hurried.
Let me say one last word-I for one am not going to spoil a hike by blasting or forcing religion on anyone. So if you meet me, I hope we call have a great time. I don't walk around judging folks and getting on them. What I was focusing on is the title on this thread and it is something like this: "leave your religious messages in town" or something like that. I feel THAT is intolerant. If one is really against litter lets tackle this in a more neutral way. -SunnyWalkerSunnyWalker, we would no doubt be friendly if we met. I agree that focusing on only religious literature is not right. I said several pages ago that only registers and notices need for hiker health and safety should be left in shelters. (http://www.whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?p=375427#post375427)
Nightwalker
07-01-2007, 07:50
Nightwalker, don't leave litter in the shelters. Circuit Rider is an intelligent person and gave you good advice that still hasn't bored its way into your thick skull.
You apparently weren't listening. The year was 2004. Circuit Rider explained. I stopped.
Which part of what I said made you want to throw in an insult?
Nightwalker
07-01-2007, 07:56
Right on target about bringing it with you! However, if you're too lazy to carry your own Bible you're probably not going to read one you happen to find laying around either. If you borrow it from others you're probably a leach and not carrying your own weight. As the song goes, "He ain't heavy, he's my brother". If you need it, or love it, carry it.
Likewise, don't leave any of your trash, tracts, etc., in shelters or on the trail. Leave No Trace; Carry In, Carry Out! And don't try to save me either.
So, let me get this straight. You think that if I forgot my Bible it's a bad thing for me to take one that someone left in a shelter for folks to take? I don't get it!
Some of you more aggressive people make no sense to me. It seems lots of you are angry all of the time or are just waiting on something to jump on.
It took one person explaining to me the reason why I shouldn't leave stuff behind for me to stop. It seems as if maybe I didn't make that clear, or else I'm not getting what y'all are saying.
The Old Fhart
07-01-2007, 10:03
Nightwalker(to me)-"So, let me get this straight. You think that if I forgot my Bible it's a bad thing for me to take one that someone left in a shelter for folks to take? I don't get it!
Some of you more aggressive people make no sense to me."You appear to be blinded by your so-called faith and are reading your own aggressive behavior into what I said. If you forget a piece of 'gear', that is your fault, so go to a store and buy it-real simple concept. The shelter's purpose are not to be a repository for whatever gear people may have forgotten. Leaving a Bible in a shelter also has nothing to do with hiking and is no different to shelter maintainers, who have to carry all that discarded stuff out, than any other discarded item. Also, a Bible left in a shelter presents only one point of view so it's sole purpose is to put forth your own point of view, nothing less. If a Bible and religion is such an important and integral part of your life, you just don't 'forget' it.
The aggressive people are the ones who leave the Bibles, despite the rules, regulations, common sense and decency against that practice. The aggressive people are the ones who 'in your face' are hell-bent on trying to save you when you don't want or need to be saved. The aggressive people are the ones who interpret every post requesting reason as an attack on their religion. The aggressive people are the ones who don't know that I carry an electronic Bible with me when I hike for my own personal use-but not to beat other people over the head with.
But you are correct about one thing. You put it quite well when you said: "I don't get it!":D
Lone Wolf
07-01-2007, 10:32
i'm very aggressive when i leave a readers digest
Appalachian Tater
07-01-2007, 11:00
However.....and can't imagine that I'd be the only one. I also ....... So who's to really say?
That part.
Appalachian Tater
07-01-2007, 11:24
Nightwalker, I figured it out while drinking my coffee: Circuit Rider is a firm believer while you are a brainwashed fanatic.
Nightwalker
07-01-2007, 18:22
Nightwalker, I figured it out while drinking my coffee: Circuit Rider is a firm believer while you are a brainwashed fanatic.
I've never done anything to you, but you like to attack me. What does that make you? Sigh.
Nightwalker
07-01-2007, 18:40
Nightwalker, I figured it out while drinking my coffee: Circuit Rider is a firm believer while you are a brainwashed fanatic.
You've got problems that I'm not part of. Let's just end this. I said that at one time I left Bibles behind, but when someone explained the issues, I stopped. I said that I'd seen someone take a Bible that someone leave behind and appreciate it. I said that I'd taken one that someone left behind and was glad that it was there for me.
You need some sort of head-meds. The fanatics aren't your problem, you are. You jumped all over me, assuming that I was taking the side of the attack-evangelists. I wasn't. They're not "Christians" at all, and they make me sick. They make a joke of my faith and do nothing at all like what the Bible says we're supposed to do. They don't do any good for anyone. But you are doing no good either, not even for yourself. I'm no blind fanatic. I'm no blind anything. However, whatever it takes to make you feel better and helps you sleep at night, you go right ahead!
Go ahead and insult me a few more times, have the last word, and try to just let this go. This vituperative spittle-slinging isn't good for you, and I'm not really enjoying being your unwitting target.
Have a nice day, tater. Get some help.
Appalachian Tater
07-01-2007, 19:30
Okey-dokey.
aaroniguana
07-01-2007, 21:31
I'm sorry, Nightwalker is absolutely correct. Just because Christians historically:
Hanged, burned alive, tortured, racked, draw and quartered and drowned people who refused to repent;
Destroyed entire civilizations in Central and South America because they refused to convert;
Tortured and killed hundreds of thousands of Jews during the Inquisitions because they refused to convert;
Killed hundreds of thousands of Muslims during the crusades because they believed something other than Christianity;
Wiped out the 400+ tribes of Celts that roamed Europe 2000 years ago;
Kept Europe in the Dark Ages for 400 years because brainwashed and uneducated people are easier to control;
Doesn't make them ALL bad people.
Frolicking Dinosaurs
07-01-2007, 21:37
I'm glad to see that despite our somewhat checkered past, you are will to give us Christian folks the the benefit of a doubt. I will try to do my part not to let you down.
dixicritter
07-01-2007, 22:45
This thread is getting too heated folks... settle down or I'll close it down. Attacks are against the rules.
I think Weasel already summed it up pretty well.
Enough.:sun
Nightwalker
07-02-2007, 00:59
Doesn't make them ALL bad people.
Don't forget that we also have to live with hearing folks do this stuff all the time, assuming that we're all alike.
The people that did those things aren't Christians. They just used Jesus' name to get power for themselves. Same for Islamic militant killers. They don't believe the Koran. They just want to hurt their enemies and use it to their own ends.
Folks, I have feelings, the same as y'all. How badly do you think that it's alright to treat me just because some idiots in the past have misused my religion? Did I personally do that? Have you ever seen me walk around beating up folks with the scriptures? No. And you won't.
Sorry that I'm not perfect, but no one is.
Nightwalker
07-02-2007, 01:03
Have a nice day, tater. Get some help.
I went too far, AT, and I'm sorry. Please forgive me. Even if you don't, I'll try not to let you get to me like this again.
Look at this from my point of view. Can you imagine getting blamed for people that have attempted to ruin your belief system by using it as a weapon for over 1,000 years? It'd be hard to bear, and I'm not good at it.
Again, I'm truly sorry.
aaroniguana
07-02-2007, 06:56
Don't forget that we also have to live with hearing folks do this stuff all the time, assuming that we're all alike.
The people that did those things aren't Christians. They just used Jesus' name to get power for themselves. Same for Islamic militant killers. They don't believe the Koran. They just want to hurt their enemies and use it to their own ends.
Nightwalker (And FD),
There was no smiley in my last post, it was not sarcasm. I know not all Christians are bad and I know that the ones who are shoving scripture down the throats of the unwilling are doing it to meet their own needs, not to follow the words of God or the teachings of Christ. Most Christians I know are nice, simple folk who eagerly distance themselves from the far right zealots who spew hate. Most of them.
I'm sorry if I offended any of you.
They just used Jesus' name to get power for themselves. Same for Islamic militant killers. They don't believe the Koran.
I am not so sure about that.
Rain Man
07-02-2007, 10:55
I went too far, AT, and I'm sorry. Please forgive me. Even if you don't, I'll try not to let you get to me like this again....
Frank, just for what it's worth, you might consider that some folks could interpret your choice of words as blaming (and even challenging?) someone. That is, when you say "I'll try not to let _YOU_ get to me like this again," that might be read as putting blame on the other guy, even if unintentionally. When you say "even if you don't...," it might be considered a challenge to do something you outlined.
To my way of thinking, a "real" apology and certainly the best apology is unqualified, unvarnished, without elaboration, and unexplained, all of which leave chance for being misinterpreted as an attempt to say the apology isn't really due anyway and to rationalize the bad behavior to begin with. I have read many "apologies" which weren't apologies at all, but simply rationalizations and justifications and sometimes even new sly (or not so sly) attacks.
Not that you went that far and I know that's not what you meant; just be aware of what happens when you say too much in an apology. Now, I apologize for being too verbose and sounding too preachy!!!
Rain:sunMan
.
Lone Wolf
07-02-2007, 11:12
damn near 400 posts in over 3 years on something that is a non-issue.
Wanderingson
07-02-2007, 11:16
Wow--Considering this thread started on the 25th of March, 2004, I'd have to say one thing.
I’m diggin’ up bones,i’m diggin’ up bones
Exhuming things that better left alone
I’m resurrecting memories of a thread that’s dead and gone
Yeah tonight I’m settlin’ alone diggin’ up bones
Frolicking Dinosaurs
07-02-2007, 11:43
ArronIguana, no offense taken here.
All passionately held beliefs (religious or not) have the ability to be twisted for evil purposes.
. . . Most Christians I know are nice, simple folk who eagerly distance themselves from the far right zealots who spew hate. . .
Possible. But then why do so many of them VOTE (and do so consistently) for the Christianist hate-mongers and/or their agendas — both of which often pander to bigotry?
Whatever the hot-button topic of the year is, you can bet many, possibly a majority, of "Christian" churches will be offering sermons just before Election Day telling their flocks how to vote. Either for or against specific candidates, or for/against ballot initiatives. And many of their their sheeple willingly, enthusiastically adhere to their marching orders.
But, hey, they are possibly "nice people."
Now . . . why do these religious leaders and their churches continue to get preferential tax treatment? If any other non-profit group stepped over the line to tell its members how to vote it would lose its tax-exempt status.
generoll
07-02-2007, 12:26
Hey skyline, how do you know what will be preached before election day? how do you know what the church members will vote for? do you have anything other then your own prejudices to offer as evidence?
as far as tax exempt status, there are a lot of non-profits which hold political views and who try to effect the outcomes of either votes or court decisions. hardly anything unique about that. it does irritate when you find a group whose views you disagree with getting preferential tax treatment. that's life.
Frolicking Dinosaurs
07-02-2007, 12:38
Skyline, as I said earlier -- any passionately held belief can be twisted. Hatemongers like James Dobson and Jerry Falwell convinced many in the last prez election that GWB was the better candidate for Christian values. The Christian right is upset that they have been hoodwinked and won't be so quick to take the word of guys like this again.
the goat
07-02-2007, 12:57
Hey skyline, how do you know what will be preached before election day? how do you know what the church members will vote for? do you have anything other then your own prejudices to offer as evidence?
as far as tax exempt status, there are a lot of non-profits which hold political views and who try to effect the outcomes of either votes or court decisions. hardly anything unique about that. it does irritate when you find a group whose views you disagree with getting preferential tax treatment. that's life.
well put.........
Hey skyline, how do you know what will be preached before election day? how do you know what the church members will vote for? do you have anything other then your own prejudices to offer as evidence?
as far as tax exempt status, there are a lot of non-profits which hold political views and who try to effect the outcomes of either votes or court decisions. hardly anything unique about that. it does irritate when you find a group whose views you disagree with getting preferential tax treatment. that's life.
If Move On.org or People For The American Way got 100% property and income tax breaks like almost every church does, I'd concede your point.
I do know that in many churches they preach and/or handout literature favoring the most extreme right-wing views on candidates, issues, etc. It is no coincidence that this happens the Sunday before Tuesday election days.
In 2004, there were sermons throughout Virginia and presumably many other states, orchestrated by coalitions of politicos and Christiianists directing the "faithful" to vote for candidates that towed the line on hot-button issues like abortion, special treatment for religious schools, persecuting gays, etc.
In 2006, a giant get-out-the-vote effort took place in churches the Sunday before election day centered around the so-called Gay Marriage Amendment. Until that Sunday, polls had the vote very close and within the margin of error. But the following Tuesday right-wing forces won overwhelmingly 57% to 43%. These churches should have the right to preach almost anything they want, but they should not at the same time enjoy tax-exempt status on their property, income, etc.
Skyline, as I said earlier -- any passionately held belief can be twisted. Hatemongers like James Dobson and Jerry Falwell convinced many in the last prez election that GWB was the better candidate for Christian values. The Christian right is upset that they have been hoodwinked and won't be so quick to take the word of guys like this again.
But these examples ARE the leaders of the "religious right." I see no evidence in polls or in what they continue to espouse that their followers want less extremism.
I am one of those religious leaders that get preferential tax treatment. lol The Government allows me to pay both sides of social security my tax rate is higher then just about anyone who makes my salary. The only tax benefit Pastors get is that they do not pay income tax on the churches pastorum ( the churches house) or their housing allowance( if the church does not have a house) but regardless they pay 15% of the rental value(or of their housing allowance) in Social Security even though they build no equity in the churches home and most do not have a house to retire into. All income is subject to regular income tax plus 15% SS. I can assure that I have had no tax brake as a pastor. The pastorate is also the only job I am aware of where your benefits are deducted from your salary( at lest that is how the Baptist do it) I am not complaining I love what I do and feel blessed to do it. However, it is a falsehood to say religious leaders do not pay taxes. I am sure just like any other profession where human beings work there has been tax fraud and voter coercion but that is not normative.
Also all of the churches I have ever been associated with have all not had any material assets other then their building and sometimes a small savings account if an emergency came up. So in the many churches I have seen first hand they might have enough in the bank to put in a couple of ac unites or part of a roof and thats it. The average size Baptist church in America (SBC largest Protestant denomination) has about 50-75 in attendance that is including the great mega churches in the average. Most all monies go into maintaining facilities and ministries. No great tax conspiracy. Also I know of no pastors in my Conservative denomination that preach sermons on who one should vote for. I am sure it has happened but not much. I have seen voters guides that list all candidates and their positions on certain issues including hot topic issues. However, they allow member to make up their own mind. The content of my preaching anyway consist of the text of the Bible verse by verse chapter by chapter. And then with all my tax brakes and super high salary I buy wicked expensive backpacking gear so I can carry a whole mess of Bibles (that is the technical term) up on the AT for people to burn lol I am kidding of course. he he
Every Blessing
Alan
generoll
07-02-2007, 16:41
considerable thread creep here, but in the absence of any verifiable facts i think i'll just let it drop. if you see a book or graffiti in a shelter that offends you, don't read it. if you want to boast about burning a book or parts of it, you're several hundred years too late.
lots of loaded language and perjorative references and as usual with matters of belief a notable absence of fact.
enjoy yourselves.
Lone Wolf
07-02-2007, 16:42
Shelters THEMSELVES offend me a lot more than the s**t IN them. Lighten up on the bibles kiddies. :sun
yup. nothin's changed
Alligator
07-02-2007, 16:46
I am one of those religious leaders that get preferential tax treatment. lol The Government allows me to pay both sides of social security my tax rate is higher then just about anyone who makes my salary. The only tax benefit Pastors get is that they do not pay income tax on the churches pastorum ( the churches house) or their housing allowance( if the church does not have a house) but regardless they pay 15% of the rental value(or of their housing allowance) in Social Security even though they build no equity in the churches home and most do not have a house to retire into. All income is subject to regular income tax plus 15% SS. I can assure that I have had no tax brake as a pastor. ...Maybe there's more to it than you are saying but as far as I know, the average Joe renter is also paying SS on his rent. The govt taxes him, then he pays his rent. You are receiving a housing allowance which equates to dollars which is tied to your salary so you should also pay taxes on that no?
Right as I said the only benefit a pastor gets is he does not pay Income taxes on the Churches house they let him live in he does pay SS on it. Most people except self-employed folks pay 7 1/2 % of there salary. Pastors pay almost 15% of their salary and as most live in Church house they pay SS on that on top of their salary. It is income though as they are not having to pay a mortgage the down side is no equity place to retire and no tax write off.
Say a pastor makes 40000 a year in a Baptist Church (which is about average for the SBC I think it is like 42 0r 45000) and say he lives in the house the church owns (which most due).
He then pays income tax and 15 %SS on the whole 40000 and just SS on the rental value of the house he lives in (the churches house).
This is a benefit and I am thankful for it. However if that pastor was a teacher making 40000 they would pay income tax and 7 1/2 % SS and then get to deduct the interest from there Mortgage although that would be and extra cost for the mortgage however he or she would build equity in a home.
I think the IRS does this because they know it would stink to be hit with both SS and income tax on something that is not yours.
On a side note most pastor would have to deduct all there benefits Health insurance etc from their salary. Pastors function essentially like self-employed folks but I think they have a few less write offs I think lol
Alligator
07-02-2007, 17:22
The self-employed have to pay the other half of SS that an employer otherwise pays. Your employer, the church, does not pay that. Either you or the church should pay that since you will be drawing on SS someday. Right?
If the teacher rents, they are paying more than you as they are paying all taxes. This really appears like you are receiving a benefit. The church having an opportunity for you to live there is between you and the church. Nobody forces you to live there. You can work elsewhere.
Does the church pay property taxes on the home they let a pastor live in? Because those stink too.
I'm sure there are poor churches. There are also some mighty grand churches in nearly every town and city. These are all granted the privilege of paying no property taxes, and most of what else they own enjoy the same breaks (schools, ballfields, summer indoctrination camps, etc.). This isn't supposed to happen when these churches get so obviously involved in politics. But yet it does.
I am unaware that secular counterparts that may or may not have different political leanings are allowed to pay no property taxes on their real estate holdings. If there are any, they sure aren't as prevalent as all these supposedly non-partisan churches.
First you are absolute right I do not mind at all paying for my SS (though I do wonder if it will be there when I retire lol) I am just saying baptist churches do not pay it for their pastors SS so they are taxed 15% for SS as they are seen as self employed buy the IRS then also taxed for income tax
Right as I said the only tax benefit a pastor receives is that he does not pay income tax on the pastorum which is a short term benefit.
The reason the IRS does this is it would not be cool to pay income tax and SS on someone else's house. I believe those in the University system who live in school housing as a benefit share this tax break but I could be wrong
Those renting do not pay property taxes the owner of the house does.
Pastors if they buy a House do pay property taxes.
However do not miss my point Gator it is a benefit not to pay income tax on the house. That is the only benefit and in real terms it is not that great a benefit but it is a benefit.
It seems many people have the false impression that pastors do not pay income tax and that is wrong my original post was to clarify that pastors do receive one tax break which I have discussed. But My over all tax structure as a % of income would be as high if not higher then the average teacher or factory worker who made the same income that is my only point. I know this as my wife is a nurse and I know how much she pays in taxes and how much I have to pay.
Every Blessing
Alan
Appalachian Tater
07-02-2007, 18:01
Natchez, I assume you report the income you receive for performing services such as weddings and funerals, but some ministers do not.
Skyline great point however many other organizations share the same tax benefit. One example would be the United Way which supports Planned Parenthood a pro abortion group they share the same benefit as any church or not for profit. Also there are many Gay churches who exist on that political platform and share the same tax structure as a fundamentalist or Evangelical churches. So I feel our Government is fair in its treatment of Ideas. And supports the free exchange of ideas. And does not establish any religion. While you may not like the message of the right which is your right lol (and I think we could still have a good laugh together) I do not think they are showing any advantage that any other religious or not for profit has. Regardless of the political persuasion if income is being made ie a salary trust me The government will get its part all factions will local, state, and federal and I guess as much as it pains me to say lol they should.
Tater I am sure you report any cash gifts or jobs you do for cash. lol Weddings and funerals in my case would not be much in a given year but yes it should be reported.
Appalachian Tater
07-02-2007, 18:30
Unfortunately I have not had much opportunity to exclude income from taxes. I am a fan of VAT instead of income tax.
The Weasel
07-02-2007, 18:49
If Move On.org or People For The American Way got 100% property and income tax breaks like almost every church does, I'd concede your point.
Actually, charitable organizations under Internal Revenue Code Sec. 501(c)(3) usually are exempt from property and income taxation, if they meet criteria which, generally, are no different fror religious organizations.
For instance, as to Virginia, this is a pretty good primer: http://law.richmond.edu/nonprofit/HowToFormANonprofit_1st_ed-Chapter3.pdf
I think you need to concede the point. Sorry; I philosophically agree with you. But you're wrong on this aspect.
PS: If MoveOn is organized for political purposes, and engages in express political actions, it is probably not a 501(c)(3) organization. And some churches that get express about "vote for" or "vote against" are investigated by the IRS.
The Weasel
Rain Man
07-02-2007, 18:55
damn near 400 posts in over 3 years on something that is a non-issue.
By a feller who has over 9,000 of such posts to his credit! ~wink~
Rain:sunMan
.
smokymtnsteve
07-02-2007, 19:01
Those renting do not pay property taxes the owner of the house does.
Incorrect..the money to pay the property taxes is included in the rent.
Appalachian Tater
07-02-2007, 19:08
Incorrect..the money to pay the property taxes is included in the rent.
Except in many cases under rent-control or -stabilization when the rent is less than the property tax alone, or the heating bill, etc.
Alligator
07-02-2007, 19:50
...
It seems many people have the false impression that pastors do not pay income tax and that is wrong my original post was to clarify that pastors do receive one tax break which I have discussed. But My over all tax structure as a % of income would be as high if not higher then the average teacher or factory worker who made the same income that is my only point. I know this as my wife is a nurse and I know how much she pays in taxes and how much I have to pay.
Every Blessing
AlanI never really thought about it but would have guessed that clergy paid taxes similar to non-clergy.
From your description, it seems that your tax status is effectively self-employed. In general, the cost of labor reflects the fact that taxes need to be paid: SS, state, federal, etc. The dislike you appear to have stems from the fact that your church does not treat you as an employee but more like a contractor. It's not at all related to how the govt treats you but rather how your business partner treats you. After all, there are other self-employed folks out there who make a living, they know what to charge to make up the difference. Your income flows through the church, yet they are not paying your SS. They are benefitting from not being required to pay your SS, and you are getting the shaft.
Skidsteer
07-02-2007, 20:41
I never really thought about it but would have guessed that clergy paid taxes similar to non-clergy.
From your description, it seems that your tax status is effectively self-employed. In general, the cost of labor reflects the fact that taxes need to be paid: SS, state, federal, etc. The dislike you appear to have stems from the fact that your church does not treat you as an employee but more like a contractor. It's not at all related to how the govt treats you but rather how your business partner treats you. After all, there are other self-employed folks out there who make a living, they know what to charge to make up the difference. Your income flows through the church, yet they are not paying your SS. They are benefitting from not being required to pay your SS, and you are getting the shaft.
I'm thinking it's a carry-over from the circuit rider days when a Minister's income typically came from more than one congregation. At least I recall hearing something along those lines.
Still some of that going on these days in poor, sparsely populated areas.
Appalachian Tater
07-02-2007, 20:51
There is also the concept of a pastor being a professional like a lawyer or physician who charges for services but is not an employee.
Religious tax shelters suck!
Skyline great point however many other organizations share the same tax benefit. One example would be the United Way which supports Planned Parenthood a pro abortion group they share the same benefit as any church or not for profit. Also there are many Gay churches who exist on that political platform and share the same tax structure as a fundamentalist or Evangelical churches. So I feel our Government is fair in its treatment of Ideas. And supports the free exchange of ideas. And does not establish any religion. While you may not like the message of the right which is your right lol (and I think we could still have a good laugh together) I do not think they are showing any advantage that any other religious or not for profit has. Regardless of the political persuasion if income is being made ie a salary trust me The government will get its part all factions will local, state, and federal and I guess as much as it pains me to say lol they should.
United Way supports both sides of the political spectrum—the Boy Scouts and their anti-agnostic/atheist/gay policies, and in some locales Planned Parenthood with their freedom of choice agenda. But I digress. Are you saying there is a similarity between the United Way giving money to non-profits, and churches which actively campaign and put the fear of God into people to vote a certain way? Are you saying if churches would lose their tax-exempt status so should United Way?
I am not aware that United Way or its top officials in most locales actively crusade for specific candidates or ballot intiative positions. Many churches do, at the pulpit and through literature pressed into the hands of congregations as they exit sanctuaries. Fine for freedom of speech but they should not be granted special financial incentives by the government when they step over that line. The federal tax code, as I understand it, prohibits tax-exempt 501(c)3 corporations from participating directly in politics. And I believe (an attorney please help us out if this is wrong) that same 501(c)3 status is one determining factor in the forgiveness of real estate taxes at the local level.
Doesn't matter IMHO if it's a fire-and-brimstone conservative church or a more progressive church—when they step over a certain boundary and become a factor in who gets elected or how a ballot initiative gets decided, they should start paying taxes on their properties.
Alligator
07-02-2007, 21:06
I'm thinking it's a carry-over from the circuit rider days when a Minister's income typically came from more than one congregation. At least I recall hearing something along those lines.
Still some of that going on these days in poor, sparsely populated areas.That's a plausible reason, there could be others, another that comes to mind is that some churches rotate their pastors out. Regardless though, he started out by bemoaning the govt. regarding his tax situation when it is his employer/business partner that is not paying him sufficient wages to cover his tax burden.
I am one of those religious leaders that get preferential tax treatment. lol The Government allows me to pay both sides of social security my tax rate is higher then just about anyone who makes my salary. ...Like I said, I could be missing something here, but it sounds like Natchez is considered self-employed?
aaroniguana
07-02-2007, 21:24
PS: If MoveOn is organized for political purposes, and engages in express political actions, it is probably not a 501(c)(3) organization. And some churches that get express about "vote for" or "vote against" are investigated by the IRS.
If... If? They advertise that they are a PAC. They get no exemption, nor should they (and I support many of their causes). Yet as much as I want political influence by the church kept to a minimum, the IRS has finally gotten control of itself and I'm not sure I want that genie out of it's bottle again.
My sister (the right Reverend) has a bumper sticker on her beat up old car that reads "Peace is the Church's Business". She's one of them good Christians I was talking about.
Skidsteer
07-02-2007, 21:33
Like I said, I could be missing something here, but it sounds like Natchez is considered self-employed?
Essentially.
But I have been self-employed for approximately seventy percent of my working years; A few years farming with my Dad and the remainder as a swimming pool contractor(these days I'm working for an employer as a Construction Manager).
As a Pool contractor I could set my prices to offset my self-employment tax-and/or lower them again if I felt it was costing me work. My choice and my judgement. A Farmer or a Minister doesn't have quite the same freedom.
How did a thread about leaving bibles in shelters get so far off course? Y'all trying to start WW#3 on WB? AS a passive bystander on this thread, it's easy to see how religious wars start!
Peace brother/sister hikers....go hiking instead of typing.
aaroniguana
07-02-2007, 21:40
Are you kidding? There's such a cross section of religions/politics/locations/genders here. People here can't agree on whether or not shelters, hiking poles or hammocks are good things, and you want us all to have the highest levels of religious tolerance?
OK, I'm in.
Alligator
07-02-2007, 22:12
Essentially.
But I have been self-employed for approximately seventy percent of my working years; A few years farming with my Dad and the remainder as a swimming pool contractor(these days I'm working for an employer as a Construction Manager).
As a Pool contractor I could set my prices to offset my self-employment tax-and/or lower them again if I felt it was costing me work. My choice and my judgement. A Farmer or a Minister doesn't have quite the same freedom.Let's stick with the minister, farming has specific government interactions that make it a different case.
A self-employed minister can negotiate his contract as much as the market will bear. If he's self-employed, he's paying the same SS taxes as other self-employed people. Some self-employed people work short contracts others long term.
Skidsteer
07-02-2007, 22:32
Let's stick with the minister, farming has specific government interactions that make it a different case.
A self-employed minister can negotiate his contract as much as the market will bear. If he's self-employed, he's paying the same SS taxes as other self-employed people. Some self-employed people work short contracts others long term.
No argument here. If, however, I were to venture into self-employment again, I would, on the basis of financial criteria, choose:
1) Anything other than Farmer or Minister
2) See # 1
And if I God really did call me to preach, y'all better watch out. That would be a sign of the end times. :p
BucketHeadnBryn
07-02-2007, 22:39
Anyone ever find a Jack Chick tract in a shelter?
I wonder what Jack Chick would have to say about all the sinners, non-beleebers, and preverts on the trail. Probably something like: "They think they're hiking to Katadin, but without accepting JESUS into their lives, they're hiking to HELL"
Also TRAIL MAGICK = WITCHCRAFTERY
Alligator
07-02-2007, 22:49
An interesting read.
http://www.drurywriting.com/keith/ministers.taxes.htm
Skip down to "double dipping":cool: .
Also mentioned on page 14 here
http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/LCMS/taxmin2004.PDF
Also, utilities, paint, furnishings etc. can all be income tax free in that rental. Somone may have left out a few perks:-?.
lol I am essential self employed but Like a farm I can not set prices lol. However I am not mad about it I am very happy in my profession I was just responding to the post that Religious leaders do not pay taxes.
Churches have a right to argue a Biblical issue. I also doubt anyone could site a church which maintains its tax free status that tells its congregation they should vote for X. However, I have no problem saying that this or that moral issue is spoken against buy scripture or a statement of belief. Nor due I have a problem with a church calling for moral purity as they define it. That is what the Unitarian Church did when they published the Pentagon papers. I disagree with just about every tent of the Unitarian religion but respect there stand to not be railroaded into not print papers that where in the public domain. Or the Amish I respect there right to be pacifist, even though I disagree with some of their core beliefs. I do not think it would be wrong to say X politician I disagree with or even that I think their stand is against my religions beliefs but I would invite my congregation to vote their conscious. Every organization will lobby for its interest to some degree. It is clear that certain candidates are more Catholic ,Jewish, Mormon, Muslim, humanist or Baptist. Bill Clinton was Southern Baptist lol. So it is only natural that Muslims would like Obama. etc Government schools do not pay taxes yet almost every teacher I have ever came across support big government and the Democratic party it is in their interest to do so.
I agree however that the Church is there to teach about their understanding of God not politics but the two can touch when a faith issue or moral issues is at stake. And any law or rule or belief system taught in school or legislated is ultimately a faith commitment.
There is nothing wrong with saying I think you are wrong that is cool. I think it is ridiculous and childish to pretend like we have to agree on every thing believe what you must and hold to it. However listen to others. I have friends of every strip I tell them I think they are wrong they tell me the same. True tollerance is being able to say you are wrong and being ok with it. This mushy your ok I am ok is the product of people who have very little conviction or guts. That is not what earned or keeps freedom.
These conversations are not offensive to me I very much enjoy hearing peoples Ideas and convictions even when I disagree. I think all of the conversion is very much related to the original question but that is just my thought.
One of the cool things about backpackers is the wonderful diversity that is seen on the trail. In creation but also in our fellow walkers. There is so much that can be learned from each other and from nature if we listen long enough and respect each other. That is the beauty of life and hiking the diversity and Glory of what God has made. I do happen to feel it is only fitting that we give God glory for it but that is my thoughts and I would never coerce some one into feeling that way. If we can both say its wonderful and that is enough for common ground.
Peace to you
Alan
nope. that's my preferred reading on the trail, not some wimpy thoreau spew
I agree. Thoreau was a pussy.
. . .Churches have a right to argue a Biblical issue. I also doubt anyone could site a church which maintains its tax free status that tells its congregation they should vote for X.
•The Roman Catholic Churches in many areas
•Most Baptist churches, especially Southern Baptists
•Most other "evangelical" clergy regardless of which denomination they are hooked up with
Let's just take Catholics for example, since that's one I have the most personal knowledge of. They threaten parishioners with being banned from participating in the Sacraments if they fail to tow the line politically. They threaten Catholic legislators--even presidential candidates--with loss of communion for voting for/against or espousing POVs contrary to Catholic dogma. They distribute political scorecards at Mass, coupled with orders from the Diocesan level to preach sermons that coincide with their distribution. But when is the last time (or the first time) a Catholic parish or a diocese lost its tax-exempt status?
I don't mean to pick on the Catholics. Some of the Protestants are probably worse. I'm sure some current or former Protestants could add to this thread in ways I cannot.
I am not aware that some of the more progressive denominations--Unitarians and United Church of Christ for instance--are this heavy-handed with their flocks. Could be they are, but doubtful. Those I know about personally are too live-and-let-live about just about everything to threaten their followers in ways similar to Catholics.
Appalachian Tater
07-03-2007, 09:32
501(c)(3) organizations cannot campaign for or against a particular candidate. There is a lot of lee-way given up to that point. Some of the things people here are complaining about are allowed. The rules do NOT apply just to churches.
http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=155030,00.html
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=161131,00.html
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=154712,00.html
Alligator
07-03-2007, 09:43
...
Now . . . why do these religious leaders and their churches continue to get preferential tax treatment? If any other non-profit group stepped over the line to tell its members how to vote it would lose its tax-exempt status.
I am one of those religious leaders that get preferential tax treatment. ...
lol I am essential self employed but Like a farm I can not set prices lol. However I am not mad about it I am very happy in my profession I was just responding to the post that Religious leaders do not pay taxes.
...
I believe the key words were preferential tax treatment. Not having to pay income taxes on the fair-market value of a rental, the utilities, the maintenence, and the furnishings is certainly preferential (and moderately large). Buy a house and it gets better because you can "double dip".
And you can set prices, you can negotiate for your salary. Further, if you strictly work under the supervision of your church, it seems to me that they ought to kick in their half of SS. Best of luck in your next contract talks.
501(c)(3) organizations cannot campaign for or against a particular candidate. There is a lot of lee-way given up to that point. Some of the things people here are complaining about are allowed. The rules do NOT apply just to churches.
http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=155030,00.html
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=161131,00.html
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=154712,00.html
A lot to read there. I skimmed over it, and it seems:
•A 501 (c) 3 organization cannot use its assets to further a candidacy or oppose a candidacy.
•A leader of a 501 (c) 3 organization cannot permit speech in favor of or in opposition toward a candidate at its own organizational event; i.e., at its own church service or at its annual convention.
•There is a sort of equal treatment provision if one campaign is allowed to influence an organization or congregation; opposing campaign(s) must be offered the same opportunities.
•501 (c) 3 must avoid any issue advocacy that functions as campaign intervention.
There is, of course, much more than I skimmed but these points seem rather clear. It seems just as clear that many churches have violated these provisions and should lose their 501 (c) 3 status. It is probable that other 501 (c) 3 organizations that are not churches have also violated them.
The Weasel
07-03-2007, 11:16
[quote=aaroniguana;376936Yet as much as I want political influence by the church kept to a minimum, the IRS has finally gotten control of itself and I'm not sure I want that genie out of it's bottle again.
My sister (the right Reverend) has a bumper sticker on her beat up old car that reads "Peace is the Church's Business". She's one of them good Christians I was talking about.[/quote]
No one of good will - you define that for yourself - wants churches to be silent on "politics," since "politics" is how social issues are resolved by government. And religions - among other groups - play a major role in social issues. For instance, I remember well the role that churches played in the Civil Rights revolution of the 50s and 60s, both Black and white churches. My own, in Michigan, was deeply conflicted by one of its ministers going to Mississippi with Freedom Riders. Should the church remain silent about civil rights abuses? Should churches have remained silent when George Wallace called for "Segregation now and segregation forever?"
The problem is that many of us want churches to stand for, and espouse, positions that WE believe are right, and to reject those we think wrong. But that's not going to happen, it shouldn't. It may not be enjoyable, but open debate simply isn't bad.
The Weasel
the goat
07-03-2007, 11:25
excellent point, the weasel.
Lone Wolf
07-03-2007, 11:28
I've ordered a bunch of these and will be leaving them in all shelters on our upcoming Long Trail hike.
www.bibletractsinc.org/tracts.asp
No one of good will - you define that for yourself - wants churches to be silent on "politics," since "politics" is how social issues are resolved by government. And religions - among other groups - play a major role in social issues. For instance, I remember well the role that churches played in the Civil Rights revolution of the 50s and 60s, both Black and white churches. My own, in Michigan, was deeply conflicted by one of its ministers going to Mississippi with Freedom Riders. Should the church remain silent about civil rights abuses? Should churches have remained silent when George Wallace called for "Segregation now and segregation forever?"
The problem is that many of us want churches to stand for, and espouse, positions that WE believe are right, and to reject those we think wrong. But that's not going to happen, it shouldn't. It may not be enjoyable, but open debate simply isn't bad.
The Weasel
The issue is not whether churches should do good works--however each church defines that.
The issue is whether they should be allowed to function as an arm of a political party, candidate, ideology, etc. and be granted the special privilege of not paying property taxes.
If you permit churches to be tax-exempt when they clearly violate the regs, then political parties themselves should be able to stake out their own claims for tax-exempt turf. Which of course they should not.
The proper thing for churches that want to be overtly political is to tell the government to shove it, and willingly pay the taxes. That way they can be even more blatant than they are now.
Gator my point is from my experience comparing the actual dollars I have paid in total taxation for the amount of bring home pay. I pay more or as much as the average person with the same bring home pay. My wife made almost the same as me for a few years so I can see what she was paying. Also my brother in law who worked for a large cooperation. He always paid less then I even though we had similar bring home pay and #child etc.
I do not for one second argue the point that there is a housing benefit I am thankful for it .
The ACLU is tax exempt they support a certain political persuasion.
Is it wrong for a clergy member or church or other tax exempt group to disagree with a given candidate when their belief system violates the groups core belief? I mean ever Moderate, mainline, denomination or tax exempt organization is going to stand in ideological disagreement with every Republican, or libertarian candidate party.
A Conservative church or organization is going to disagree on moral grounds and Ideological grounds with not all but many Democrat ideas.
I am not Roman Catholic nor do I know much about them but I bet they are rarely a for a given candidate it is simply a default position because the opposing candidate supports a position that is against their sacred beliefs (abortion would be an example). The opposite would be true for Planned Parenthood they would never say anything positive about a candidate that was pro-life. I think both are being logically consistent. My faith informs my morality my morality informs my vote it would be logically inconsistent for me not to say I support X because she or he best represents my morality or our statement of belief. That is democracy.lol
I believe churches or any organization are an "arm" of a political party only as far as it suits their individual interest. Say on where a gay pastor he or she would most likely support any candidates regardless of party who best represents their interest it just so happens that historically that is the democratic party so the majority of gay pastors will support most vocally democrats.
All that being said churches like individuals should on somethings exercise civil disobedience like Civil rights, free speech, religious freedom.
We should never forget that religious freedom and the freedom of ideas is why we are a country.
The Weasel
07-03-2007, 12:36
The issue is not whether churches should do good works--however each church defines that.
The issue is whether they should be allowed to function as an arm of a political party, candidate, ideology, etc. and be granted the special privilege of not paying property taxes.
If you permit churches to be tax-exempt when they clearly violate the regs, then political parties themselves should be able to stake out their own claims for tax-exempt turf. Which of course they should not.
The proper thing for churches that want to be overtly political is to tell the government to shove it, and willingly pay the taxes. That way they can be even more blatant than they are now.
Dude, I heard all this back in the '60s. I was an active Episcopalian, and several parishes then were accused ofc pushing an "ideology" - it was even equated by the Director of the FBI as "communistic" - of civil rights for blacks. Many churches in the South - including some that were Episcopalian, I'll sadly admit - called from the pulpit for the election or defeat of many candidates. Indeed, despite his efforts, there were many Protestant churches in 1960 who explicitly called for the defeat of Jack Kennedy because he was Catholic.
Most churches play little direct political role; a few play a more overt one. But it's part of the territory: Is abortion murder, according to your religion? If yes, then shouldn't it be prosecuted as such? That's one of the roles of government - to prosecute crime - and you should elect those who will prosecute it. Is it a sin against God's requirement that we be stewards of the Earth for us to pollute the air, water and ground? Then isn't it hypocrisy for a church to remain silent? Or should it simply be cute about it, and say, "Don't support those who would permit pollution"?
Folks, much of what we are as a nation that is good is thanks to the role of religion in politics - the defeat of slavery comes to mind - as well as a lot that is not. But trying to make churches not 'speak to power' is like trying to tell the waves to stop rolling in from the ocean. Didn't work for Knut, won't work for you.
The Weasel
Gator by the way a flat tax or a consumer income tax I would support for then every one would pay the same even illegals and the super wealthy.
Weasel I think you are right. lol I really like Robert Service by the way
The Weasel
07-03-2007, 12:41
The ACLU is tax exempt they support a certain political persuasion.
And which one is that? The Nazi Party, for whose free speech rights they fought for in Skokie? The Republican Party, the home of business, for whose commercial speech rights the ACLU has also fought? Libertarians? Democrats? All of the above?
Stop with the stereotype.
The Weasel
Lone Wolf
07-03-2007, 12:42
the ACLU supports pedophiles
The Weasel
07-03-2007, 12:46
the ACLU supports pedophiles
No, Wolf, it supports the rights of pedophiles, murderers, Methodists, Nazis, schoolchildren, Mexican-Americans, even alcohloics and racists and, to be honest, pretty damn all of us, to be free from unwarranted, illegal and unconstitutional actions of government.
The Weasel
Lone Wolf
07-03-2007, 12:48
No, Wolf, it supports the rights of pedophiles, murderers
they have no rights. end of discussion
The Weasel
07-03-2007, 12:52
they have no rights. end of discussion
They do if they live in the United States of America, Wolf. If you don't like that, you're living in the wrong place. Simple choice.
The Weasel
Alligator
07-03-2007, 13:19
Gator my point is from my experience comparing the actual dollars I have paid in total taxation for the amount of bring home pay. I pay more or as much as the average person with the same bring home pay. My wife made almost the same as me for a few years so I can see what she was paying. Also my brother in law who worked for a large cooperation. He always paid less then I even though we had similar bring home pay and #child etc.
....It's because you are self-employed, not specifically because you are a minister.
Did you include the value of your housing into your take home total? (I think no.) Do you pay for the utilities? If no, count that in too. Whatever that magic number is that you have to pay SS but no income tax on. That is part of your salary. It's part of your whole package. Workers have a certain take home number, but it costs more than that in employer paid benefits and employer paid SS.
You have not demonstrated that self-employed ministers are taxed at a higher rate than other self-employed people. Show me the tax code. All I see is that you get a nice benefit in regard to housing expenses.
And you are not automatically self-employed, that is a result of your relationship to your church. Many times these "self-employed" positions are used to avoid paying a worker their full due in benefits. I think they are raking you over. It's time to form a union (or a schism).
Dude, I heard all this back in the '60s. I was an active Episcopalian, and several parishes then were accused ofc pushing an "ideology" - it was even equated by the Director of the FBI as "communistic" - of civil rights for blacks. Many churches in the South - including some that were Episcopalian, I'll sadly admit - called from the pulpit for the election or defeat of many candidates. Indeed, despite his efforts, there were many Protestant churches in 1960 who explicitly called for the defeat of Jack Kennedy because he was Catholic.
Most churches play little direct political role; a few play a more overt one. But it's part of the territory: Is abortion murder, according to your religion? If yes, then shouldn't it be prosecuted as such? That's one of the roles of government - to prosecute crime - and you should elect those who will prosecute it. Is it a sin against God's requirement that we be stewards of the Earth for us to pollute the air, water and ground? Then isn't it hypocrisy for a church to remain silent? Or should it simply be cute about it, and say, "Don't support those who would permit pollution"?
Folks, much of what we are as a nation that is good is thanks to the role of religion in politics - the defeat of slavery comes to mind - as well as a lot that is not. But trying to make churches not 'speak to power' is like trying to tell the waves to stop rolling in from the ocean. Didn't work for Knut, won't work for you.
The Weasel
Once again, I'm only talking about the preferential tax treatment they get. Not whether they do good or bad. If they want to promote political candidates, parties, or take sides in ballot initiatives they should forgo the tax breaks. That's what the regs say, now why aren't they enforced?
And which one is that? The Nazi Party, for whose free speech rights they fought for in Skokie? The Republican Party, the home of business, for whose commercial speech rights the ACLU has also fought? Libertarians? Democrats? All of the above?
Stop with the stereotype.
The Weasel
Agreed. The ACLU does something sooner or later to piss nearly everyone off. Thankfully.
the goat
07-03-2007, 14:07
the ACLU supports pedophiles
hell, some of 'em are pedophiles!
the president of the board of directors here in arlington, Charles Rust-Tierney was busted recently. U.S. Magistrate Judge Theresa C. Buchanan said the material found on Rust-Tierney's computer was "the most perverted and nauseating and sickening type of child pornography" she has seen in 10 years on the bench.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/10/AR2007051002082.html
The Weasel
07-03-2007, 15:06
Once again, I'm only talking about the preferential tax treatment they get. Not whether they do good or bad. If they want to promote political candidates, parties, or take sides in ballot initiatives they should forgo the tax breaks. That's what the regs say, now why aren't they enforced?
And what is "the preferential tax treatment" and who is "they"? Ministers and othe clergy pay income taxes the same as everyone else, and housing allowances are no different for them than for a myriad of other people. Often, the housing is not even terribly desireable, and people - like you - in the churches try to convince the minister how wonderful it is to get it "free." Unfortunately, that results in salaries usually being reduced, but the minister never gets the chance to build any equity in their house or to use the "preferential tax treatment" that homeowners get for mortgage interest and taxes.
Frankly, you're just dead wrong on the tax issue; churches, charitable organizations, private schools (which, by the way, routinely provide housing for their CEOs) and all other 501(c)(3) groups play by the same rules.
Pick another way to attack churches; but this one's a busted flush.
The Weasel
Alligator
07-03-2007, 15:28
Try the links in post #429 regarding preferential tax treatment The Weasel, you're a little behind.
And what is "the preferential tax treatment" and who is "they"? Ministers and othe clergy pay income taxes the same as everyone else, and housing allowances are no different for them than for a myriad of other people. Often, the housing is not even terribly desireable, and people - like you - in the churches try to convince the minister how wonderful it is to get it "free." Unfortunately, that results in salaries usually being reduced, but the minister never gets the chance to build any equity in their house or to use the "preferential tax treatment" that homeowners get for mortgage interest and taxes.
Frankly, you're just dead wrong on the tax issue; churches, charitable organizations, private schools (which, by the way, routinely provide housing for their CEOs) and all other 501(c)(3) groups play by the same rules.
Pick another way to attack churches; but this one's a busted flush.
The Weasel
Please read my other posts in this thread before you go on attack. I have not even addressed the potential taxable events you itemize.
The preferential tax treatment is, AGAIN, that churches do not pay real estate taxes on their holdings. Not on the church building itself, not on most everything else they own.
501 (c) 3 status is certainly a factor that local governments use to decide which entities deserve to be tax-exempt. Churches, among others, violate IRS rules when they become obviously political. When they cross that line, they should be stripped of their 501 (c) 3 status, and among other things they would lose (like the ability for donors to deduct their contributions to a church on their own tax forms) their real estate should at that time be eligible for local taxation.
So my question is, why does the IRS turn a blind eye to such organizations--most typically churches--when they violate IRS regs?
the goat
07-03-2007, 16:37
So my question is, why does the IRS turn a blind eye to such organizations--most typically churches--when they violate IRS regs?
it's a government conspiracy against the non-believers!
it's a government conspiracy against the non-believers!
For the last six-plus years, you got that, um, right!
Brrrb Oregon
07-03-2007, 16:52
Just my two cents:
Christians are called to spread the Good News first, and if that requires rendering under Caesar, well, so be it. We're in a democracy. Nowhere in the Good Book does it say: Thou shalt not imperil thy tax-exempt status. Having said that, I don't think it unreasonable if those of us with an official ministerial capacity with a tax-exempt church choose to put forward how that particular faith tradition applies in political situations in a general sense and let others decide how that applies to a particular candidate or proposed law. There isn't anything hypocritical about that, and the laws were obviously written to specifically allow it.
OTOH, because we are a democracy, the laws of the land are those of a legitimate civil authority, which Christians are to obey when it is not in direct violation with the Gospel. Picking up after yourself hardly falls in that category.
The rule at the shelters and on the trail is, for legitimate reason, that individuals should not leave behind any items, food or not, which encourage rodents. As Christians, it doesn't do any good to try to spread the Gospel by word if we're not willing to do it in action. We're called to love, love isn't rude, it is rude to thoughtlessly draw rodents for other people to cope with. Christian or not, take all your stuff with you as you go. It is as simple as that, IMHO. Leave the shelters as clean and uncluttered as you'd want others of other beliefs (or non-beliefs) to leave them for you.....meaning, it wouldn't hurt to habitually leave them a little nicer than you found them. Nobody is going to ask you about God if you can't even find it in yourself to be average decent. Why would they assume we know anything, if we act like that?
Just my two cents.
I say leave the bibles. I need the kindling
The Weasel
07-03-2007, 17:30
Try the links in post #429 regarding preferential tax treatment The Weasel, you're a little behind.
Gator, I noted both of them, and while I'll take the one (done by a non-CPA/tax lawyer) with a bit of salt, I'll take a leap of faith (forgive the pun) that the Lutheran Church ran their booklet past a qualified tax advisor (or, more likely, it was done by one). A more certain source is that provided by the IRS, which is here:
http://www.unclefed.com/IRS-Forms/2001/HTML/p52502.html
So thanks for noting it better for me. But frankly, I'm not sure that "different" means "preference", or that, effectively, there's really a lot of difference in tax effect, for several reasons:
First, the overwhelming majority of churches in the US are small, and housing allowances or houses ("rectories", "manses" or whatever) are small and generally not adequate for full housing costs, nor are the homes generally comparable, at the upper end, to where the church members live. It's not a bargain, and there are precious few clergy in the US who wouldn't prefer to have taxable income they could use directly for a 'free choice'.
Second, to the extent that housing is 'in kind' (i.e. a real building), ministers don't get the chance to develop the largest asset the rest of us own: A home: After 7 years (typical turnover time), they leave with zero equity.
Third, and the biggest problem: If ministers had the income (as taxable income) they would do as the rest of us do: They would deduct 100% of the mortgage interest and taxes from income, wiping out most of the income tax on that amount. Then they would deduct repairs, telephone, and all the other costs associated with owning a home required by their employer to be 'in use' at all times (essentially the 'home office') component, to the extent of that use (usually 25% or thereabouts). Most professionals get some, if not all, of this effect, if they have an employer-required necessary office/facility in their home.
Fourth, outside of the military (some of the time) and some - but not all - college presidents, clergy are about the only profession whose employers often tells them where to live, with no choice. While this isn't part of the tax effect, almost no minister looking for a job ("pulpit", "call", whatever) to a church that owns a home can say, "Sure, I'll take the job, but forget the house. Just give me the money." The Church is stuck with the home, and simply will turn to the next candidate. While this doesn't directly impact on taxes, it does indirectly; ministers understandably aren't as wildly enthusiastic about a "benefit" that they have little choice over and which is wealth-destructive to them, particularly when they are, as a group, a poorly paid profession in light of the education they have and the demands made upon them.
The upshot is that there is a difference in treatment, and almost no difference in overall tax burden. It's about the biggest sore point in clergy compensation. Tell most clergy about how they have a "great deal the rest of us don't" and you'll get an earful.
The Weasel
Alligator
07-03-2007, 17:57
If we must be specific, try http://www.irs.gov/faqs/faq4-10.html. Who's unclefed?
Rebuttal to The Weasel's post #460.
Regarding 1) that's between the minister and the church and is not relevant to Uncle Sam and the minister.
2)Ministers can own their own homes, that again is between the congregation and the minister. But further, as mentioned in those articles and the this IRS doc http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc417.html, they can exclude the housing allowance from income tax and claim the interest for a deduction. A notable benefit.
"The gross income of a licensed, commissioned or ordained minister does not include the fair rental value of a home (a parsonage provided), or a housing allowance paid, as part of the minister's compensation for services performed that are ordinarily the duties of the minister. If you own your home, you may still claim deductions for mortgage interest and property taxes. If your housing allowance exceeds your actual expenses, you must include the amount of the excess as other income. "
3) Your point 3 shows you haven't read these topics carefully, nor my previous posts. Whether it's a rental or owned, the minister may deduct utilities and other home maintenence costs. "A minister who receives a housing allowance may exclude the allowance from gross income to the extent it is used to pay expenses in providing a home. Generally, those expenses include rent, mortgage interest, utilities, repairs, and other expenses directly relating to providing a home." [tc417]
4) Again, this is between the church and the minister. They have a choice, take the job or not. I suggested a union or a schism earlier:D .
I think the stipulation that clergy reside in church property less than ideal. I still see the tax benefits however as "preferential".
The Weasel
07-03-2007, 18:17
If we must be specific, try http://www.irs.gov/faqs/faq4-10.html. Who's unclefed?
Rebuttal to The Weasel's post #460.
Regarding 1) that's between the minister and the church and is not relevant to Uncle Sam and the minister.
2)Ministers can own their own homes, that again is between the congregation and the minister. But further, as mentioned in those articles and the this IRS doc http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc417.html, they can exclude the housing allowance from income tax and claim the interest for a deduction. A notable benefit.
"The gross income of a licensed, commissioned or ordained minister does not include the fair rental value of a home (a parsonage provided), or a housing allowance paid, as part of the minister's compensation for services performed that are ordinarily the duties of the minister. If you own your home, you may still claim deductions for mortgage interest and property taxes. If your housing allowance exceeds your actual expenses, you must include the amount of the excess as other income. "
3) Your point 3 shows you haven't read these topics carefully, nor my previous posts. Whether it's a rental or owned, the minister may deduct utilities and other home maintenence costs. "A minister who receives a housing allowance may exclude the allowance from gross income to the extent it is used to pay expenses in providing a home. Generally, those expenses include rent, mortgage interest, utilities, repairs, and other expenses directly relating to providing a home." [tc417]
4) Again, this is between the church and the minister. They have a choice, take the job or not. I suggested a union or a schism earlier:D .
I think the stipulation that clergy reside in church property less than ideal. I still see the tax benefits however as "preferential".
Gator ---
When the rubber meets the road, it's what's known as a 'tax neutral' situation, but it's also one that history rules the present: It's a provision that has been relied on so much that it is very difficult for churches to get out of it, since they can't raise clergy salaries enough for the minister to get decent housing. If it's a preference, it's a Pyrric one, literally: "One more preference such as this, and we are lost."
Sure, clergy can deduct much of the operating cost of their homes; that was my point: So can you, if you have an office or other facility in your home that your employer, for its (not your) convenience. Ask a minister how happy they are being told - including when they rent - that they have a 24/7 church facility where they also are allowed to sleep. Better yet, ask their spouse how they like that. They're not getting anything for free there, pardner.
As for preferences, well, most occupations have them in the tax code, and most people don't say, "Well, if you take those, you should shut up about politics." If that were the case, well, a lot of Republican business leaders would have to zip it, and so would a lot of Democrat trial lawyers. And all the rest. (Hey! You over there with the farm subsidies! Shut up!)
The Weasel
Y'all continue to talk about personal income taxes. The real preferential treatment concerns real estate taxes.
aaroniguana
07-03-2007, 18:33
Sorry, I'm a little behind. No wifi in the field...
No one of good will - you define that for yourself - wants churches to be silent on "politics," since "politics" is how social issues are resolved by government.
Weasel, I don't completely disagree with that statement. Unfortunately religion has been overpowering the government with a Christian agenda and those of us who are not Jewish, Christian nor Muslim in this country have been told to sit down and shut up since Ford left office. The only reason deceased veterans are now (and only recently) allowed "alternative markings" on their markers (read pentacles/athema/grain/buddhist writings) is because the military hospital system in general and the VA in particular have been under extreme scrutiny since we invaded Afghanistan and they began leaving combat veteran amputees on the street.
I don't mind being a minority but I won't be shoved in a corner and politically ignored because some arrogant Christian leaders think I'm hellbound and meaningless.
Brrrb Oregon
07-03-2007, 19:11
What does the tax code have to do with cleaning up after yourself at the shelters? :-?
Skidsteer
07-03-2007, 19:19
What does the tax code have to do with cleaning up after yourself at the shelters? :-?
Just typical thread drift.
Skidsteer
07-03-2007, 19:21
What does the tax code have to do with cleaning up after yourself at the shelters? :-?
And if you're going to invest in a tax shelter, you ought to keep it clean.
And if you're going to invest in a tax shelter, you ought to keep it clean.
Tax shelters suck. err, nevermind. :p
Lone Wolf
07-03-2007, 19:32
Tax shelters suck. err, nevermind. :p
yup. any kind of shelter sucks.
The Weasel
07-03-2007, 19:44
Sorry, I'm a little behind. No wifi in the field...
Weasel, I don't completely disagree with that statement. Unfortunately religion has been overpowering the government with a Christian agenda and those of us who are not Jewish, Christian nor Muslim in this country have been told to sit down and shut up since Ford left office. The only reason deceased veterans are now (and only recently) allowed "alternative markings" on their markers (read pentacles/athema/grain/buddhist writings) is because the military hospital system in general and the VA in particular have been under extreme scrutiny since we invaded Afghanistan and they began leaving combat veteran amputees on the street.
I don't mind being a minority but I won't be shoved in a corner and politically ignored because some arrogant Christian leaders think I'm hellbound and meaningless.
Iggy: You're right, and you're wrong.
I disagree with a lot of what I hear from churches on "social" (read: "political") issues, but nothing is keeping you or anyone else quiet. If we want to counteract what other groups - and not just churches - say, we're free to form our own groups, and try to get 50% plus one of the votes. That's how the game is played. If we don't like those rules, we should find our own little anti-religious tyranny to live in. Mostly, that's North Korea or Cuba, so I'll stick with democracy.
As for pentacles and Buddhism, thank the ACLU and the Courts, not the VA. They didn't do squadoodly out of the goodness of their hearts.
If you don't like being pushed around, then push back. Vote. Join advocacy groups. Write. Speak. But, as Rock would say/has said: Don't snivel about it.
Keep on keepin' on, Iggy!
The Weasel
The Weasel
07-03-2007, 19:45
What does the tax code have to do with cleaning up after yourself at the shelters? :-?
Does government persecute, or grant preferential treatment to, Christian groups?
The Weasel
The Weasel
07-03-2007, 19:46
yup. any kind of shelter sucks.
Wow! First ever admission by anyone in the USA that they don't take any deductions, not even the standard deduction.
Those are tax shelters, of course. Good for you, Wolf! Pay more taxes! Thank you! Thank you!
The Weasel
Weasel you have explained the situation with ministers far better than I could. Like I said though I am not at all upset about my profession or taxation of my profession I like what I do and am treated well. I just do not like it when people have the false assumption we (ministers) do not pay taxes. Once again thanks Weasel for a great summery.
Lone Wolf
07-03-2007, 20:01
i make shelters a little less sucky by leaving bible tracts and such
Alligator
07-03-2007, 20:07
Y'all continue to talk about personal income taxes. The real preferential treatment concerns real estate taxes.You brought it up;) .
Alligator
07-03-2007, 20:11
Gator ---
..
Sure, clergy can deduct much of the operating cost of their homes; that was my point: So can you, if you have an office or other facility in your home that your employer, for its (not your) convenience. Ask a minister how happy they are being told - including when they rent - that they have a 24/7 church facility where they also are allowed to sleep. Better yet, ask their spouse how they like that. They're not getting anything for free there, pardner.
...
They can deduct all of their utilities (however that is exactly defined), subject to salary levels and fair market conditions. If I have a home office, it's basically suggested to use the square footage of the work area. The IRS is conservative on that point. It's not the same deduction and not nearly as liberal as that afforded the clergy. If you start claiming your whole house as a work zone, expect an audit.
It's not tax neutral, it's a benefit.
As for preferences, well, most occupations have them in the tax code, and most people don't say, "Well, if you take those, you should shut up about politics." If that were the case, well, a lot of Republican business leaders would have to zip it, and so would a lot of Democrat trial lawyers. And all the rest. (Hey! You over there with the farm subsidies! Shut up!)
The WeaselI never argued the point that those receiving them should be quiet. I was merely pointing out that they do exist. Natchez's description seemed a bit lacking. I'd have to know the exact reasoning behind the benefits to argue that.
I think you're a little loose with the most occupations bit. I can think of no job I have ever had that had a job specific tax exemption (and that's a variety) except for student.
Rain Man
07-03-2007, 22:19
Does government persecute, or grant preferential treatment to, Christian groups?
The answer to that often depends on WHICH "Christian group" you ask the question of.
Rain:sunMan
.
SunnyWalker
07-03-2007, 23:35
Skidsteer: good joke about making sure your tax shelters [emphasis mine] are clean-ha, ha, ha, ho, ho, hee, hee.
-SunnyWalker
CoyoteWhips
07-03-2007, 23:45
Without reading the whole thread, I kind of wonder if I'm the only one who scrolls past the title and gets the urge to go leave religious messages in towns?
Without reading the whole thread, I kind of wonder if I'm the only one who scrolls past the title and gets the urge to go leave religious messages in towns?
LOL..........
Nightwalker
07-04-2007, 00:20
Every Blessing
Alan
Thanks for the post.
Y'all continue to talk about personal income taxes. The real preferential treatment concerns real estate taxes.
Excellent point.
Doners to most every Church also enjoy the substancial advantage of being able to deduct the contributions they make on thier Federal Income taxes.
You can't do that when you contribute to The Sierra Club.
Because The Sierra Club works to influence the political landscape.
Like many of these Churches don't?
Seems strange that the Sierra Club and Churches with activist agendas are permitted to play by different rules.
You brought it up;) .
I've made it clear that I believe the real preferential treatment concerns the non-taxation of real estate owned by churches that cross over the line into crusading politically. I am not under the impression that this preferential treatment extends to the personal income taxes of clergy.
Cookerhiker
07-04-2007, 08:49
Excellent point.
Doners to most every Church also enjoy the substancial advantage of being able to deduct the contributions they make on thier Federal Income taxes.
You can't do that when you contribute to The Sierra Club.
Because The Sierra Club works to influence the political landscape.
Like many of these Churches don't?
Seems strange that the Sierra Club and Churches with activist agendas are permitted to play by different rules.
Well technically they're subject to the same rules. I think the reason churches seemingly get away with political advocacy (at least in the enodrsement of candidates) is that oraganizations like the Sierra Club or, on the right, the Club for Growth, are governed by boards who formally adopt political positions or explicitly delegate such to their officers & staff. Everything is more overt and there's a paper trail. For those churches operating under boards of trustees, elders, deacons whatever they call them, I doubt there's much of a paper trail but they send the signal that the pastor/leader can speak out. So they turn it into a "free speech" issue.
And for those churches which are basically dictatorships where the founder/pastor runs things with an iron hand, he (and it's always a he) is exercising his right of free speech and there's certainly no paper trail of "the church" taking a position. Of course in those cases, the pastor is the church.
One other point is that left-leaning churches and right-leaning churches, despite their theological and political differences, will rapidly unite and support each other to resist any effort by the IRS or Congress to silence their advocacy by revoking tax status.
Alligator
07-04-2007, 19:44
I've made it clear that I believe the real preferential treatment concerns the non-taxation of real estate owned by churches that cross over the line into crusading politically. I am not under the impression that this preferential treatment extends to the personal income taxes of clergy.Like I said, if you didn't see it as clearly preferential then you shouldn't have brought it up. It's kind of hard for you to complain about the direction of a thread when it was your post that initiated the discussion:rolleyes: .
...
Now . . . why do these religious leaders and their churches continue to get preferential tax treatment? If any other non-profit group stepped over the line to tell its members how to vote it would lose its tax-exempt status.
Exclusionary comments regarding God, Jesus, the Bible and religious materials stem from the current antiGod culture spawned by our secular humanistic educational system...dating back to the 60's in particular...many of the school and university teachers having been indoctrinated during that period leading to successive generations of similar minded individuals. I believe this supercedes the issue of LNT. I personally am a follower of Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior...I carry a testiment with me while hiking...I don't leave anything...if someone wants to converse about spiritual matters, I will join in...when the conversation is so heated that no good can derive from it, I withdraw. I can read and pray myself since my Heavenly Father loves me and loves the fellowship He has with those who believe in Him. His love should exude from those who acknowledge Him...I John tells us that the world will know that we belong to the Lord by our love for one another! The Bible does not call Christians to politisize but to be faithful in sharing the good news that Jesus the Christ loved us so much that He came to earth to die on the cross for our redemption...He came that we might have life and that more abundantly...as well as the assurance of eternal life with Him. Pax Vobiscum
SunnyWalker
07-04-2007, 21:22
Xray: Good posting. Thanks for your testimony. I appreciate the encouragement. I like your attitude and am the same (re sharing on the At and at shelters, etc.). Christ is Lord and He has given me peace and abundant life. Thanks again for the testimony, Xray. -SunnyWalker
Exclusionary comments regarding God, Jesus, the Bible and religious materials stem from the current antiGod culture spawned by our secular humanistic educational system...dating back to the 60's in particular...many of the school and university teachers having been indoctrinated during that period leading to successive generations of similar minded individuals. I believe this supercedes the issue of LNT. I personally am a follower of Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior...I carry a testiment with me while hiking...I don't leave anything...if someone wants to converse about spiritual matters, I will join in...when the conversation is so heated that no good can derive from it, I withdraw. I can read and pray myself since my Heavenly Father loves me and loves the fellowship He has with those who believe in Him. His love should exude from those who acknowledge Him...I John tells us that the world will know that we belong to the Lord by our love for one another! The Bible does not call Christians to politisize but to be faithful in sharing the good news that Jesus the Christ loved us so much that He came to earth to die on the cross for our redemption...He came that we might have life and that more abundantly...as well as the assurance of eternal life with Him. Pax Vobiscum
If all "Christians" did was "be faithful in sharing the good news that Jesus the Christ loved us so much that He came to earth to die on the cross for our redemption..." we probably would not be having discussions like these. Too many of your brothers and sisters go way beyond that, and use their religious dogmas to legislate how we ALL live.
Like I said, if you didn't see it as clearly preferential then you shouldn't have brought it up. It's kind of hard for you to complain about the direction of a thread when it was your post that initiated the discussion:rolleyes: .
The operative word was "leaders." Clearly, my inclusion of "religious leaders" in the question I posed was in complaint of the special tax breaks the properties involved in their vast empires receive. It's hard to separate the late Jerry Falwell from his Thomas Road Baptist Church or Liberty University, the late Bob Jones or his son Stephen from Bob Jones University, the Pope from the Vatican, etc. I did not comment upon lower echelon pastors because frankly I don't know what if any special tax treatment they receive—tho I'm inclined to think little or no.
Alligator
07-05-2007, 00:06
...
Now . . . why do these religious leaders and their churches continue to get preferential tax treatment?
...Nice try Skyline, but the above sentence clearly has a compound subject. If you were just referring to the properties, you should have left the phrase "religious leaders" out.
Carry on:banana .
aaroniguana
07-05-2007, 00:08
Too many of your brothers and sisters go way beyond that, and use their religious dogmas to legislate how we ALL live.
They are no one's brothers or sisters. Fanatics and zealots stand alone with their God. Just ask one. The problem is that sheep always need a shepherd. Good shepherds are difficult to find.
superman
07-05-2007, 07:54
They are no one's brothers or sisters. Fanatics and zealots stand alone with their God. Just ask one. The problem is that sheep always need a shepherd. Good shepherds are difficult to find.
By "Good shepards" you may not be including Jim and Tammy Baker, the pedophile priests and soo many others? Yet they are surprised that church attendance is down to about only 20%. LOL, then they boost attendance (cash flow) by expanding the base by way of allowing gays and shelter mice. The sage leadership saw the light no doubt. So, are you saying that christian churchs are bad or are you saying the christian churches with the sheeple in them are bad or just the sheeple who don't pack their trash out?:-?
Nice try Skyline, but the above sentence clearly has a compound subject. If you were just referring to the properties, you should have left the phrase "religious leaders" out.
Carry on:banana .
OK, so I need to go back to Creative Writing 101. But I know what I meant, and chances are most other folks did too.
Alligator
07-05-2007, 09:15
OK, so I need to go back to Creative Writing 101. But I know what I meant, and chances are most other folks did too.I was fairly certain what you meant, I actually had to check a couple times to see where Natchez was talking about. Sorry for the long interruption.
Appalachian Tater
07-05-2007, 10:15
Exclusionary comments regarding God, Jesus, the Bible and religious materials stem from the current antiGod culture spawned by our secular humanistic educational system...dating back to the 60's in particular...many of the school and university teachers having been indoctrinated during that period leading to successive generations of similar minded individuals. I believe this supercedes the issue of LNT. I personally am a follower of Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior...I carry a testiment with me while hiking...I don't leave anything...if someone wants to converse about spiritual matters, I will join in...when the conversation is so heated that no good can derive from it, I withdraw. I can read and pray myself since my Heavenly Father loves me and loves the fellowship He has with those who believe in Him. His love should exude from those who acknowledge Him...I John tells us that the world will know that we belong to the Lord by our love for one another! The Bible does not call Christians to politisize but to be faithful in sharing the good news that Jesus the Christ loved us so much that He came to earth to die on the cross for our redemption...He came that we might have life and that more abundantly...as well as the assurance of eternal life with Him. Pax Vobiscum
Pax Vobiscum right back atcha, bud! :banana:banana:banana
SunnyWalker
07-13-2007, 00:05
Is it thru hikers leaving bibles and gospel traks or local church groups close to the shelters?
-SunnyWalker
Appalachian Tater
07-13-2007, 00:41
Mostly seems to be Jews for Jesus groups from colleges near the trail.
SunnyWalker
07-13-2007, 20:42
App Tater: and have you seen this? Anyone witnessed first hand who leaves the lit? Is it fellow hikers or local church groups?
-SunnyWalker
Appalachian Tater
07-14-2007, 00:18
App Tater: and have you seen this? Anyone witnessed first hand who leaves the lit? Is it fellow hikers or local church groups?
-SunnyWalker
I was just joking about the Jews for Jesus, you probably realized that.
As far as who leaves the litter, sometimes they write identifying info. I have never personally seen it being left. Likely it is mostly day hikers except at shelters right off the road, then who knows. It is doubtful a thru-hiker would carry the extra weight. A lot of hikers carry a small bible or other book for their own use.
The thru-hikers mentioned in the first post on this thread probably no longer litter the shelters but they bought a house right off the trail and post signs offering food and then after the hikers have eaten, question them about their religion and try to give them books to take with them on the trail. They had two friends die "unsaved", one from cancer and one by suicide, and they want to prevent anyone else from dying "unsaved". They are nice people and I hope they can eventually find peace in their hearts about the loss of their friends. Fairly harmless but still, it's not fair to "ambush" hikers with religious interrogation while they are under obligation as guests in your home. Honestly, I would have skipped the food had i known.
I have a lot more respect for the people who serve more as by example than by preaching. I can think of five right off who were affiliated with religious organizations in conjunction with what they were doing with hikers. Not one of them "preached".
Lone Wolf
07-14-2007, 13:55
jesus saves. but what heck is it exactly that he saves? coupons? what?